加工方式与“啊哈”体验对顿悟记忆优势效应的影响
The Effects of Processing Modes and “Aha” Experience on the Insight Memory Superiority Effect
摘要: 已有研究证实顿悟存在记忆优势效应,但其核心机制是生成加工还是“啊哈”体验仍存争议,且二者对顿悟过程中不同信息的记忆影响尚未明确。本研究采用学习–测试范式,以中文远距离联想任务为实验材料,操纵加工方式与有无“啊哈”体验,探究二者对目标字和线索字再认效果的影响。行为结果表明,在目标字再认中,自发顿悟的记忆效果更优,表现为相较于诱发顿悟,自发顿悟的再认击中率更高,再认反应时更短,信心评分更高;在线索字再认中,有“啊哈”体验的记忆效果更好,表现为相较于无“啊哈”体验,有“啊哈”体验的再认击中率显著更高。本研究证实加工方式与“啊哈”体验对目标字和线索字的记忆影响存在差异性,加工方式对目标字的记忆再认影响起主导作用,而“啊哈”体验对线索字的记忆再认影响更显著。
Abstract: Existing studies have confirmed the existence of the memory superiority effect in insight, yet the core mechanism underlying this effect—whether it stems from generative processing or the “Aha” experience—remains controversial. Additionally, their differential impacts on the memory of distinct types of information during the insight process have not been clearly elucidated. Adopting a learning-testing paradigm and using Chinese Remote Association Test (CRAT) items as experimental materials, the present study manipulated processing modes and the presence or absence of the “Aha” experience to investigate their effects on the recognition performance of target words and cue words. Behavioral results showed that for target word recognition, spontaneous insight yielded superior memory outcomes: compared with induced insight, spontaneous insight was associated with a higher recognition hit rate, shorter recognition response time, and higher confidence ratings. For cue word recognition, the presence of the “Aha” experience led to better memory performance, as evidenced by a significantly higher recognition hit rate relative to the absence of the “Aha” experience. This study confirms that processing modes and the “Aha” experience exert differential effects on the memory of target words and cue words: processing modes play a dominant role in the recognition of target words, while the “Aha” experience has a more prominent impact on the recognition of cue words.
文章引用:曾雨馨, 李晓琪 (2026). 加工方式与“啊哈”体验对顿悟记忆优势效应的影响. 心理学进展, 16(4), 94-102. https://doi.org/10.12677/ap.2026.164178

参考文献

[1] 陈石, 梁正, 李香兰, 陈嫣然, 赵庆柏, 于全磊, 于全磊, 李松清, 周治金, 刘丽中(2021). 新颖语义联结在顿悟促进记忆效果中的作用. 心理学报, 53(8), 837-846.
[2] 赖燕群, 杨琪, 黄宝珍, 赛李阳(2019). 记忆的顿悟优势效应. 心理科学进展, 27(12), 2034-2042.
[3] 沈汪兵, 刘昌, 袁媛, 张小将, 罗劲(2013). 顿悟类问题解决中思维僵局的动态时间特性. 中国科学: 生命科学, 43(3), 254-262.
[4] 吴真真, 邱江, 张庆林(2009). 顿悟脑机制的实验范式探索. 心理科学, 32(1), 122-125.
[5] 姚海娟, 沈德立(2005). 顿悟问题解决的心理机制的验证性研究. 心理与行为研究, 3(3), 188-193.
[6] 袁媛, 沈汪兵, 施春华, 刘畅, 刘取芝, 刘昌(2016). 顿悟体验的心理与神经机制. 心理科学进展, 24(9), 1329-1338.
[7] 张庆林, 邱江(2005). 顿悟认知机制的研究述评与理论构想. 心理科学, 28(6), 1435-1437.
[8] 周月(2022). 诱发式顿悟的项目记忆和联结记忆优势效应研究. 硕士学位论文, 广州: 广州大学.
[9] Auble, P. M., Franks, J. J., Soraci, S. A., Soraci, S. A., & Soraci, S. A. (1979). Effort toward Comprehension: Elaboration or “Aha”? Memory & Cognition, 7, 426-434.[CrossRef
[10] Bilalić, M., Graf, M., Vaci, N., & Danek, A. H. (2019). When the Solution Is on the Doorstep: Better Solving Performance, but Diminished Aha! Experience for Chess Experts on the Mutilated Checkerboard Problem. Cognitive Science, 43, e12771.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[11] Bilalić, M., Graf, M., Vaci, N., & Danek, A. H. (2021). The Temporal Dynamics of Insight Problem Solving—Restructuring Might Not Always Be Sudden. Thinking & Reasoning, 27, 1-37.[CrossRef
[12] Bowden, E. M., & Jung-Beeman, M. (2003). Aha! Insight Experience Correlates with Solution Activation in the Right Hemisphere. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 730-737.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[13] Burns, D. J. (1992). The Consequences of Generation. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 615-633.[CrossRef
[14] Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd Ed.). Routledge.[CrossRef
[15] Cushen, P. J., & Wiley, J. (2011). Aha! Voila! Eureka! Bilingualism and Insightful Problem Solving. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 458-462.[CrossRef
[16] Danek, A. H., Fraps, T., von Müller, A., Grothe, B., & Öllinger, M. (2013). Aha! Experiences Leave a Mark: Facilitated Recall of Insight Solutions. Psychological Research, 77, 659-669.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[17] Danek, A. H., Fraps, T., von Müller, A., Grothe, B., & Öllinger, M. (2014). It’s a Kind of Magic What Self-Reports Can Reveal about the Phenomenology of Insight Problem Solving. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article 1408.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A Flexible Statistical Power Analysis Program for the Social, Behavioral, and Biomedical Sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175-191.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[19] Kizilirmak, J. M., Wiegmann, B., & Richardson-Klavehn, A. (2016). Problem Solving as an Encoding Task: A Special Case of the Generation Effect. The Journal of Problem Solving, 9, 1-18.[CrossRef
[20] Kounios, J., & Beeman, M. (2014). The Cognitive Neuroscience of Insight. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 71-93.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[21] Ludmer, R., Dudai, Y., & Rubin, N. (2011). Uncovering Camouflage: Amygdala Activation Predicts Long-Term Memory of Induced Perceptual Insight. Neuron, 69, 1002-1014.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[22] Martinsen, Ø. L., & Furnham, A. (2019). Cognitive Style and Competence Motivation in Creative Problem Solving. Personality and Individual Differences, 139, 241-246.[CrossRef
[23] Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978). The Generation Effect: Delineation of a Phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 592-604.[CrossRef
[24] Storm, B. C., Angello, G., & Bjork, E. L. (2011). Thinking Can Cause Forgetting: Memory Dynamics in Creative Problem Solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1287-1293.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[25] Webb, M. E., Little, D. R., & Cropper, S. J. (2016). Insight Is Not in the Problem: Investigating Insight in Problem Solving across Task Types. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 1424.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[26] Wiley, J., & Danek, A. H. (2024). Restructuring Processes and Aha! Experiences in Insight Problem Solving. Nature Reviews Psychology, 3, 42-55.[CrossRef