以往研究多認同內隱記憶不會受到干擾的影響,但主要集中于編碼時的干擾不會影響隨后的內隱記憶提取成績,而對于提取時的干擾是否也不會影響內隱記憶成績仍存在疑義。該文在實驗1采用學習-測驗范式,通過在提取階段設置同時干擾任務進一步考察提取干擾與內隱記憶的關系,結果表明提取干擾下并未發現明顯的啟動效應,即提取干擾破壞了內隱記憶。為進一步探討內隱記憶的提取干擾效應是否源于記憶與干擾刺激同時呈現所引起的知覺表征競爭,實驗2改變了記憶與干擾刺激的呈現順序,結果表明不論干擾刺激在記憶項目之前或之后呈現,啟動效應均受到影響。相比之下,提取干擾對再認成績的影響并不明顯(實驗3)。上述結果表明,內隱記憶的提取干擾效應是源于一般認知資源的競爭,在提取過程中任何能夠產生認知資源競爭的變量設置都可能會削減內隱測驗中的啟動效應。

A wide range of studies have shown that executing the other secondary task during encoding has little influence on implicit memory(repetition priming). Somewhat surprisingly, relatively few studies discussed the effects of interference on implicit memory during retrieval, which was confirmed as a process distinct from encoding, but also important in memory. Furthermore, an open question remains as to whether the retrieval interference could affect implicit memory? The effect of interference during retrieval was assessed by comparing a divide-attention(DA) condition, on which participants carried out a memory task(lexical decision) and an interference task(even-odd decision) simultaneously or successively, with a full-attention(FA) condition, on which participants performed only the memory task or interference task. Each experiment consisted of five parts: a study phase, a distraction phase, twice FA interference phases, and a retrieval phase, which included above two types attention conditions. Thirty-five undergraduate students participated in Experiment 1, which investigated whether synchronous interference task during retrieval could affect implicit memory. Experiment 2 further examined whether asynchronous interference could also change the priming of implicit retrieval. Thirty participants took part in Experiment 3, which was designed to examine whether such interference could affect explicit memory retrieval. Therefore, it replaced the lexical decision with recognition task based on Experiment 1. Participants were instructed to make response to corresponding items by pressing keyboard, and were told that the memory and interference task were equally important. They were asked to perform both tasks as quickly and accurately as possible. The Reaction Time(RT) and Accuracy data in retrieval phase were recorded, in order to assess priming effects, the effect of interference and interference task costs. The results showed that, first, the repetition priming results(the facilitation or bias in processing of studied items) were quite consistent across Experiment 1 and 2 both on RT and Accuracy. It reflected that priming would be impacted by interference task, whatever the distraction and memory stimulus presented synchronously or asynchronously. Second, In Experiment 3, there was non-significant difference across attention conditions in recognition Accuracy. Third, we followed Lozito and Mulligan’s(2010) method for examining interference task costs. They proposed two measures to obtain distracting task costs for verifying the effects of interference. One of them would work out global costs, which was assessed by comparing performance on the interference task when performed under DA to FA. We found global costs occurred among three experiments, indicating that attention resource competition happened across dual tasks. But significant specific costs, which comparing performance on interference among DA, was only found in Experiment 3, indicating that explicit retrieval would break secondary task performance, whereas, implicit retrieval seemingly has little impact on interference task, but easily influenced by interference task. In conclusion, results from the current study revealed that implicit memory priming could not be regarded as an automatic form of retrieval with ease. And it’s necessary for memory retrieval to catch enough cognitive resources. If limited resource was occupied by the other task, implicit retrieval processing would be impacted.