{"title":"思维抑制所涉及的执行功能:尝试整合两种范式的研究。","authors":"Aneta Niczyporuk , Edward Nęcka","doi":"10.1016/j.concog.2024.103765","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>There are two main thought suppression research paradigms: the White Bear and Think/No-Think paradigms. In Think/No-Think research, thought suppression is effective and is considered to be mediated by prepotent response inhibition. Conversely, in White Bear studies, thought suppression is counterproductive and appears to engage resistance to proactive interference. However, findings regarding the involvement of these executive functions in each task are mixed. In the current study, two thought suppression procedures were compared. Using Friedman and Miyake’s inhibitory functions model (2004) it was investigated whether the differences between thought suppression tasks can be explained by involvement of different executive functions. The results showed that the suppression phases of both procedures were correlated, but the outcomes of suppression were unrelated. There was no evidence supporting the involvement of the examined executive functions in either thought suppression task. Commonalities and discrepancies of the two tasks are discussed along with their external validity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51358,"journal":{"name":"Consciousness and Cognition","volume":"125 ","pages":"Article 103765"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Executive functions involved in thought suppression: An attempt to integrate research in two paradigms\",\"authors\":\"Aneta Niczyporuk , Edward Nęcka\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.concog.2024.103765\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>There are two main thought suppression research paradigms: the White Bear and Think/No-Think paradigms. In Think/No-Think research, thought suppression is effective and is considered to be mediated by prepotent response inhibition. Conversely, in White Bear studies, thought suppression is counterproductive and appears to engage resistance to proactive interference. However, findings regarding the involvement of these executive functions in each task are mixed. In the current study, two thought suppression procedures were compared. Using Friedman and Miyake’s inhibitory functions model (2004) it was investigated whether the differences between thought suppression tasks can be explained by involvement of different executive functions. The results showed that the suppression phases of both procedures were correlated, but the outcomes of suppression were unrelated. There was no evidence supporting the involvement of the examined executive functions in either thought suppression task. Commonalities and discrepancies of the two tasks are discussed along with their external validity.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51358,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Consciousness and Cognition\",\"volume\":\"125 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103765\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Consciousness and Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053810024001326\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Consciousness and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053810024001326","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Executive functions involved in thought suppression: An attempt to integrate research in two paradigms
There are two main thought suppression research paradigms: the White Bear and Think/No-Think paradigms. In Think/No-Think research, thought suppression is effective and is considered to be mediated by prepotent response inhibition. Conversely, in White Bear studies, thought suppression is counterproductive and appears to engage resistance to proactive interference. However, findings regarding the involvement of these executive functions in each task are mixed. In the current study, two thought suppression procedures were compared. Using Friedman and Miyake’s inhibitory functions model (2004) it was investigated whether the differences between thought suppression tasks can be explained by involvement of different executive functions. The results showed that the suppression phases of both procedures were correlated, but the outcomes of suppression were unrelated. There was no evidence supporting the involvement of the examined executive functions in either thought suppression task. Commonalities and discrepancies of the two tasks are discussed along with their external validity.
期刊介绍:
Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal provides a forum for a natural-science approach to the issues of consciousness, voluntary control, and self. The journal features empirical research (in the form of regular articles and short reports) and theoretical articles. Integrative theoretical and critical literature reviews, and tutorial reviews are also published. The journal aims to be both scientifically rigorous and open to novel contributions.