执行控制资源损耗对自传体记忆生动性和情绪的影响

摘要： 旨在探究健康个体执行控制资源损耗对自传体记忆生动性及情绪的影响。实验一采用Stroop任务探讨了一般执行控制资源损耗的影响，结果发现损耗组自传体记忆生动性和情绪强度显著低于控制组。实验二进一步探讨不同的执行控制资源损耗的影响，结果显示中央执行的资源损耗对生动性和情绪强度影响最大，而视空间模板与语音环之间没有显著差异。实验结果支持了自传体记忆的执行控制资源受损理论和资源有限理论，并对临床治疗具有实际应用价值。
Abstract: According to previous research, the research thought of sad image motion of the individual spontaneous circulation, and interference, the content of these images is derived from the negative life events of the past. According to the autobiographical memory model, the study says it is because of people in the knowledge base of autobiography, these images are composed of many feel a particular event details of fragments rather than the overall storage, thus leading to extracting incomplete or inaccurate. Williams et al. (2007) has been confirmed after healthy individuals by the ego depletion, the vividness of autobiographical memory will be relatively reduced, and there were few studies have confirmed that ego depletion whether vividness of autobiographical memory. The purpose of the research study is to investigate that the ego depletion influent emotional vividness of autobiographical memory and emotional intensity. Andrade et al. concluded that interfering with the visuospatial slave system of working memory could potentially be used to blunt the emotional intensity of traumatic images during therapy, and thus provide an intervention tool for severely distressed patients. The therapeutic benefit of a visuospatial interference task during imaginal reliving rests on the assumption that traumatic images are visual in content. Although visual representations are indeed most common, intrusive images do occur in other modalities (e.g., sounds, smells, bodily sensations), and often comprise several sensory components (Ehlers et al., 2002; Hackmann, Clark, & McManus, 2000). Kavanagh et al. (2001) suggested that these patients might benefit from an auditory interference task during imaginal reliving treatment. Although Andrade et al. (1997) reported no effect of concurrent articulatory suppression on ratings of vividness and emotionality of distressing images, their null finding may well reflect the emphasis on the visual sensory modality in their methodology. In particular, they used visual stimuli (photographs) to elicit emotive images, and chose anchors for their vividness rating scale that encouraged participants to form specifically visual images. Hence the effect of a concurrent phonological load on emotive imagery has yet to be adequately tested. Theoretically, dual-task interference from concurrent visuospatial or auditory