Attention and conceptual priming: Limits on the effects of divided attention in the category-exemplar production task

被引:34
作者
Mulligan, NW [1 ]
Stone, M
机构
[1] So Methodist Univ, Dept Psychol, Dallas, TX 75275 USA
[2] NASA, Ames Res Ctr, Moffett Field, CA 94035 USA
[3] Stanford Univ, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
关键词
attention and memory; implicit and explicit memory; divided attention;
D O I
10.1006/jmla.1999.2648
中图分类号
H0 [语言学];
学科分类号
030303 ; 0501 ; 050102 ;
摘要
Prior research indicates that dividing attention during encoding reduces conceptual priming. The present study examines a limitation of this effect. Experiment la, in apparent contradiction to earlier research (Mulligan, 1997), found no effect of attentional load on later conceptual priming. Experiments 1b, 2, and 3 indicate that the discrepant results are not due to participant, materials, or power differences among studies, but rather to certain procedural differences. In particular, increased attentional load fails to reduce conceptual priming in the category-exemplar production task only when the categorical structure of the study list is salient (i.e., list items are blocked by category) and when attentional load is manipulated within categories, Experiment 4 indicates that processing earlier examples in the study block under full attention confers immunity to divided attention effects for later examples in the block. In contrast, if the first category members are in a divided-attention condition, then the usual negative effects of divided attention obtain. Experiment 5 verifies that this outcome is not due to within-block serial position effects, which occur for category-cued recall bur not category-exemplar production (rendering a new dissociation between matched conceptual explicit and implicit tests). The results are discussed in terms of item-specific and relational encoding processes. (C) 1999 Academic Press.
引用
收藏
页码:253 / 280
页数:28
相关论文
共 92 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], MEMORY ORG STRUCTURE
[2]  
[Anonymous], VARIETIES MEMORY CON
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1995, EXPT DESIGN
[4]  
Atkinson R C., 1968, PSYCHOL LEARN MOTIV, V2, P89, DOI [DOI 10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60422-3, 10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60422-3]
[5]   ATTENTION AND RETRIEVAL FROM LONG-TERM-MEMORY [J].
BADDELEY, A ;
LEWIS, V ;
ELDRIDGE, M ;
THOMSON, N .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 1984, 113 (04) :518-540
[6]  
Baddeley A., 1986, WORKING MEMORY
[7]   CATEGORY NORMS FOR VERBAL ITEMS IN 56 CATEGORIES - A REPLICATION AND EXTENSION OF CONNECTICUT CATEGORY NORMS [J].
BATTIG, WF ;
MONTAGUE, WE .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1969, 80 (3P2) :1-&
[8]   SEMANTIC PROCESSING AND MEMORY FOR ATTENDED AND UNATTENDED WORDS IN DICHOTIC-LISTENING - BEHAVIORAL AND ELECTROPHYSIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE [J].
BENTIN, S ;
KUTAS, M ;
HILLYARD, SA .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 1995, 21 (01) :54-67
[9]  
BENTIN S, 1994, ATTENTION PERFORM, P551
[10]   EFFECTS OF AUTOMATIC ASSOCIATIVE ACTIVATION ON EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT MEMORY TESTS [J].
BESSON, M ;
BOAZ, T ;
FISCHLER, I ;
RANEY, G .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 1992, 18 (01) :89-105