中文摘要：

探讨在RSVP任务中重复刺激的呈现位置和报告方式对重复知盲效应的影响，检验该研究提出的注意资源最优化假设和末位优势效应。实验1操作了刺激性质和重复刺激位置，得出了刺激性质和重复刺激位置的交互效应；实验2操作了刺激性质和情景信息，结果是交互效应不显著；实验3操作了刺激性质和报告方式，出现了刺激性质和报告方式的交互效应。该结果表明：（1）由于注意资源分配的优化，重复刺激有末位优势效应。（2）重复知盲的产生不是发生在知觉阶段，而是发生在报告阶段。（3）注意资源分配最优化理论比建构／归因理论能更合理地解释重复知盲的发生。

英文摘要：

People are adept at identifying short lists of consecutively presented items in a rapid serial visual presentation （RSVP） paradigm. However, they often fail to detect repetitions of items （C 1 and C2） when they are separated by one intervening item. This phenomenon is called repetition blindness （RB; Kanwisher, 1987）. In the literature, there were mainly two views explaining why and how RB occurred, namely, ＂activation/inhibition＂ view and ＂construction/attribution＂ view （Morris, Still, ＆ Caldwell-Harris, 2009）. Neither view could explain the results from studies supporting the other view. Thus, the present study proposed an Optimization Allocation of Attention Resources Hypothesis. People can allocate attention resources according to the task to get the best recall performance. In a RSVP paradigm with repeated items, people may sacrifice deep processing of repeated items to detect non-repeated items, so RB may be caused by little attention paid to repeated items. According to the hypothesis, RB on the item repeated at the last position in RSVP would decrease because people allocated more attention to the item at the last position than to the item in the middle; no matter the context of the repeated item changed or not, RB would keep constant because people always allocate more attention to non-repeated items than to the repeated item; in a backward recall task, RB would reduce because people allocate more attention to C2 （presented later than C 1） to get better recall. The present study conducted three experiments with the RSVP paradigm to verify the Optimization Allocation of Attention Resources Hypothesis for RB. In all three experiments, the researchers used a within-subject design with two variables, manipulating Repetition （repeated and non-repeated） throughout the study and changing the other variable. Experiment 1 manipulated Position （middle and last） to investigate how the presenting position affected RB. Experiment 2 manipulated Context （changed and not-changed?