不同冲动性水平大学生的工作记忆和转换能力及其关系研究

发布时间：2018-03-19 14:32

本文选题：冲动性　切入点：执行功能　出处：《广西师范大学》2013年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：冲动性(impulsive)是一个多维度的概念,一般定义为行为缺乏考虑、不成熟、过度冒险或做出与环境不适应导致不好结果的行为。相关研究表明抑制失控是导致个体冲动的深层次原因。抑制是执行功能其中一项核心的子功能,指对自主优势的反应进行有意识抑制控制的能力,即指抑制不符合当前需要的或不恰当行为反应的能力,并做出合适的选择性反应。它与工作记忆、转换等其它执行功能关系密切,并且在相应任务的加工中激活的脑区部分彼此重叠。因此,个体抑制功能的好坏应该明显表现出不同的冲动性水平,冲动性强的个体抑制能力弱,反之亦然。其次,由于执行功能之间的相关联性,抑制能力弱也可能对其它执行功能有消极影响(例如：工作记忆和转换功能)。故研究需要从上述角度切入进行相关探索。实验一考察冲动性水平具有差异的个体在抑制能力测试上和反眼跳任务是否也有差异,以证实冲动问卷与抑制计算机测查任务之间具备一致性。具体表现为高冲动水平的个体的抑制表现显著差于低冲动水平的个体。问卷测量使用Barratt冲动量表中文版(The Chinese version of the Barratt Impulsiveness Seale,11th version, BIS-11-C),行为测量使用色词Stroop任务(Color Words Stroop Task)和空间Stroop任务(Spatial Stroop Task)两种行为范式。眼跳任务为抑制反眼跳测试。结果显示BIS-11-C问卷区分的高低水平组的被试的抑制测试成绩存在显著差异,具体表现为冲动强的组别在Stroop任务上的冲突效应和错误率均显著高于冲动弱的组别。而且对于目标方向向左的眼跳正确率而言,冲动低组的正确率显著高于冲动高组的正确率,并且对修正眼跳正确率而言,冲动低组的正确率平均值显著高于冲动高组的正确率。这说明BIS-11-C冲动性问卷测试区分个体抑制能力强弱与抑制的计算机测试的区分力之间存在一致性。实验二探究不同冲动性水平的大学生是否具有差异显著的工作记忆和转换能力。从而证实抑制与工作记忆和转换的关系,以间接推测出执行功能的结构。工作记忆测量使用字母记忆任务(Letter Memory)和数字记忆任务(Digit Memory)两种范式。转换测量使用图形转换任务(Objects Shifting)和符号转换任务(SymbolShifting)。结果显示抑制能力较强的一组被试工作记忆的成绩高于抑制能力较弱的一组,但没有达到显著水平。冲动组别在图形转换成绩上呈临界显著水平,但在符号转换上却没有出现显著水平,抑制能力较强的组别转换代价更小成绩更好。这说明冲动性高的个体的转换能力较弱,但工作记忆能力不受影响。结论：1、冲动性问卷测试对于区分个体抑制能力的强弱与抑制计算机测试的区分力具有一致性。2、冲动性高的个体的图形转换能力较弱,但工作记忆能力不受影响,工作记忆更容易受到言语熟悉性和广度因素的影响。3、抑制与工作记忆和转换之间的关系密切,但有各自独立发挥作用,这支持了工作记忆与抑制、转换三种执行功能之间的既联系又分离的结构特点。
[Abstract]:Impulse (impulsive) is a multi-dimensional concept, generally defined as lack of consideration, not mature, excessive risks or making bad results and not adapt to the environment caused by behavior. Research shows that inhibitory control is the deep causes of individual impulse. Suppression is one of the core executive function sub function refers to the self advantage reaction ability to consciously control, which does not meet the current needs of the ability to suppress inappropriate behavior or reaction, and make the appropriate selective reaction. It and working memory, executive function and other close relationship, and activation in the corresponding processing tasks in brain regions overlap with each other therefore, the quality should be obvious inhibition of individuals showed different levels of impulsivity, strong impulse of individual inhibitory ability is weak, and vice versa. Secondly, because the associated executive function between Sex and inhibition ability may also have negative effects on other executive functions (such as working memory and switching function). Therefore, researches need to be explored from above angles.
Has a difference test impulse level individuals also have differences in inhibition ability test and anti saccade task is, to have the consistency between computer and questionnaire confirmed impulse inhibition survey task. The specific performance of the high level of the individual impulse inhibition performance was significantly lower than the low level of impulse individuals. Questionnaire survey using Barratt impulse the scale Chinese Version (The Chinese version of the Barratt Impulsiveness Seale, 11th version, BIS-11-C), behavior measurement using color word Stroop task (Color Words Stroop Task) and Stroop (Spatial Stroop Task space mission) two kinds of behavior paradigm. To suppress the anti saccade saccade test. The results show that there are significant differences between high and low level of group BIS-11-C the subjects of the questionnaire to distinguish inhibition test results, the specific performance of impulse strong group conflict effect in the Stroop task and the error rate significantly That impulse is weak group. For the target and direction left saccade accuracy, impulse correct rate low group was significantly higher than that of the correct rate of high impulsiveness group, and the correct rate of correct saccades, impulse correct rate low group was significantly higher than the average rate of correct high impulsiveness group. This shows that there is consistency between BIS-11-C impulsivity questionnaire distinguish individual inhibitory ability and inhibition test of the strength of computer discriminative.
Whether the experiment two to explore the different impulse level of college students has significant difference in working memory and conversion ability. In order to confirm the relationship between inhibition and working memory and conversion, to indirectly infer structure of executive function of working memory. The measurement using letter memory task (Letter Memory) and digital memory task (Digit Memory) two conversion paradigm. Measurement using graphics conversion task (Objects Shifting) and symbol conversion task (SymbolShifting). The results showed that the inhibitory ability of a group of subjects working memory scores were higher than that of a group of inhibitory ability is weak, but did not reach significant level. A significant level in the critical impulse group graphics conversion result, but did not appear significant in the conversion of symbols, inhibit ability of the switch cost smaller groups better. This shows that impulsive individuals with high conversion ability is weak, but remember Memory is not affected.
Conclusion: 1, impulsivity questionnaire to distinguish individual inhibitory ability is consistent with inhibition of.2 computer test to distinguish between impulsive force, high individual graphics conversion ability is weak, but is not affected by working memory capacity, working memory is more susceptible to the.3 language familiarity and breadth factors, the relationship between inhibition with the working memory and the conversion is close, but have their own independent function, which support the working memory and inhibition, the structure characteristics of conversion between the three executive functions both the connection and separation.

【学位授予单位】：广西师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：B848;G645.5

【参考文献】