冲突控制中比例效应的理论争议与进展
The Development and Theoretical Controversy of Proportion Congruent Effect in Interference Control
DOI: 10.12677/AP.2017.71012, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 1,640  浏览: 2,160 
作者: 余方文, 王祥鹏：西南大学心理学部认知与人格教育部重点实验室，重庆
关键词: 冲突控制；比例效应；神经机制；认知控制策略；灵活性；Interference Control； Proportion Congruent Effect； Neural Mechanism； Cognitive Control Strategies； Flexibility
摘要: 冲突控制在过去几十年里主要关注于研究冲突适应现象的行为表现和神经机制，却忽略了另一个影响冲突解决的重要方面——任务背景。比例效应是指冲突效应的大小会随着不一致试次比例的升高而减小的现象，其反映了执行控制根据不同的任务背景进行自上而下调整的能力。本文梳理了比例效应相关研究，总结了有关比例效应的主流理论解释。关于比例效应争议主要存在于两方面：比例效应是否由认知控制主导；以及来源于LWPC还是ISPC。借助于行为和神经影响的研究证据，作者认为比例效应反映了不同任务背景下的冲突控制加工，并在此基础上提出从认知策略灵活性角度来解释比例效应的可能性。
Abstract: The studies of interference control have prosperously development in the past decades and most of the surveys focused on the behavior performance and neural mechanism of confliction adaptation which means participants enhance the efficiency of interference resolution after they experienced confliction. Whereas, task context, which may be has important influence on interference control, has neglected by these studies. Proportion congruent (PC) effect, which means the size of Stroop effect could be linearly decreased with the proportion of incongruent trials increased, reflects how the interference control exerts the top-down adjustment according to different task contexts. In this article, we first summarized the studies related to PC effect and elucidated the theoretical accounts about PC effect. There is a fierce debate among these theories: 1) Whether the PC effect is modulated by cognitive control or not? 2) Is the PC effect originated from LWPC or ISPC? Based on behavior and fMRI studies, we think cognitive flexibility may be a good way to make a full understand of PC effect. PC effect reflects the process of interference control which modulated by different task context. The flexibility of cognitive control strategies, which exerts through distinct ways of top-down control and adjusts by task contexts, may be the neural mechanism underlying PC effect.
文章引用：余方文, 王祥鹏 (2017). 冲突控制中比例效应的理论争议与进展. 心理学进展, 7(1), 88-95. http://dx.doi.org/10.12677/AP.2017.71012

参考文献

[1] 唐丹丹, 刘培朵, 陈安涛(2012). 冲突观察能诱发冲突适应. 心理学报, 44(3), 295-303.
[2] 徐雷, 唐丹丹, 陈安涛(2012). 主动性和反应性认知控制的权衡机制及影响因素. 心理科学进展, 20(7), 1012-1022.
[3] Blais, C., & Bunge, S. (2010). Behavioral and Neural Evidence for Item-Specific Performance Monitoring. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 22, 2758-2767. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2009.21365
[4] Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict Monitoring and Cognitive Control. Psychological Review, 108, 624. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.624
[5] Botvinick, M. M., Cohen, J. D., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Conflict Monitoring and Anterior Cingulate Cortex: An Update. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 539-546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.10.003
[6] Braver, T. S. (2012). The Variable Nature of Cognitive Control: A Dual Mechanisms Framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16, 106-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.12.010
[7] Bugg, J. M. (2012). Dissociating Levels of Cognitive Control the Case of Stroop Interference. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 302-309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721412453586
[8] Bugg, J. M., & Chanani, S. (2011). List-Wide Control Is Not Entirely Elusive: Evidence from Picture-Word Stroop. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 930-936. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0112-y
[9] Bugg, J. M., & Crump, M. J. (2012). In Support of a Distinction between Voluntary and Stimulus-Driven Control: A Review of the Literature on Proportion Congruent Effects. Front Psychol, 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00367
[10] Bugg, J. M., & Hutchison, K. A. (2013). Converging Evidence for Control of Color-Word Stroop Interference at the Item Level. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 433. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029145
[11] Bugg, J. M., Jacoby, L. L., & Toth, J. P. (2008). Multiple Levels of Control in the Stroop Task. Memory & Cognition, 36, 1484-1494. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.8.1484
[12] Carter, C. S., Macdonald, A. M., Botvinick, M., Ross, L. L., Stenger, V. A., Noll, D., & Cohen, J. D. (2000). Parsing Executive Processes: Strategic vs. Evaluative Functions of the Anterior Cingulate Cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97, 1944-1948. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.97.4.1944
[13] Cocchi, L., Zalesky, A., Fornito, A., & Mattingley, J. B. (2013). Dynamic Cooperation and Competition between Brain Systems during Cognitive Control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17, 493-501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2013.08.006
[14] Cole, M. W., Reynolds, J. R., Power, J. D., Repovs, G., Anticevic, A., & Braver, T. S. (2013). Multi-Task Connectivity Reveals Flexible Hubs for Adaptive Task Control. Nature Neuroscience, 16, 1348-1355. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3470
[15] Diamond, A. (2013). Executive Functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135-168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750
[16] Dosenbach, N. U., Fair, D. A., Cohen, A. L., Schlaggar, B. L., & Petersen, S. E. (2008). A Dual-Networks Architecture of Top-Down Control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 99-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.01.001
[17] Dosenbach, N. U., Fair, D. A., Miezin, F. M., Cohen, A. L., Wenger, K. K., Dosenbach, R. A., Petersen, S. E. et al. (2007). Distinct Brain Networks for Adaptive and Stable Task Control in Humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 11073-11078. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0704320104
[18] Gratton, G., Coles, M. G., & Donchin, E. (1992). Optimizing the Use of Information: Strategic Control of Activation of Responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 480-506. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.121.4.480
[19] Grosjean, M., Rosenbaum, D. A., & Elsinger, C. (2001). Timing and Reaction Time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 256-272. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.130.2.256
[20] Jacoby, L. L., Lindsay, D. S., & Hessels, S. (2003). Item-Specific Control of Automatic Processes: Stroop Process Dissociations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 638-644. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196526
[21] Leech, R., Braga, R., & Sharp, D. J. (2012). Echoes of the Brain within the Posterior Cingulate Cortex. Journal of Neuroscience, 32, 215-222. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3689-11.2012
[22] Leech, R., Kamourieh, S., Beckmann, C. F., & Sharp, D. J. (2011). Fractionating the Default Mode Network: Distinct Contributions of the Ventral and Dorsal Posterior Cingulate Cortex to Cognitive Control. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 3217-3224. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5626-10.2011
[23] Logan, G. D., & Zbrodoff, N. J. (1979). When It Helps to Be Misled: Facilitative Effects of Increasing the Frequency of Conflicting Stimuli in a Stroop-Like Task. Memory & Cognition, 7, 166-174. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197535
[24] MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a Century of Research on the Stroop Effect: An Integrative Review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163-203. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.109.2.163
[25] Matzel, L. D., Held, F. P., & Miller, R. R. (1988). Information and Expression of Simultaneous and Backward Associations: Implications for Contiguity Theory. Learning and motivation, 19, 317-344. https://doi.org/10.1016/0023-9690(88)90044-6
[26] Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An Integrative Theory of Prefrontal Cortex Function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24, 167-202. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.167
[27] Schmidt, J. R. (2013a). Questioning Conflict Adaptation: Proportion Congruent and Gratton Effects Reconsidered. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 615-630. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0373-0
[28] Schmidt, J. R. (2013b). Temporal Learning and List-Level Proportion Congruency: Conflict Adaptation or Learning When to Respond? PLoS ONE, 8, e82320. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0082320
[29] Schmidt, J. R., & Besner, D. (2008). The Stroop Effect: Why Proportion Congruent Has Nothing to Do with Congruency and Everything to Do with Contingency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 514-523. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.34.3.514
[30] Schmidt, J. R., & De Houwer, J. (2011). Now You See It, Now You Don’t: Controlling for Contingencies and Stimulus Repetitions Eliminates the Gratton Effect. Acta Psychologica, 138, 176-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.06.002
[31] Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of Interference in Serial Verbal Reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643-662. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054651
[32] Torres-Quesada, M., Funes, M. J., & Lupiáñez, J. (2013). Dissociating Proportion Congruent and Conflict Adaptation Effects in a Simon-Stroop Procedure. Acta Psychologica, 142, 203-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.11.015
[33] Torres-Quesada, M., Lupiáñez, J., Milliken, B., & Funes, M. (2014). Gradual Proportion Congruent Effects in the Absence of Sequential Congruent Effects. Acta psychologica, 149, 78-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.03.006
[34] Tzelgov, J., Henik, A., & Berger, J. (1992). Controlling Stroop Effects by Manipulating Expectations for Color Words. Memory & Cognition, 20, 727-735. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202722