Attention effects of abrupt-onset precues with central, single-element, and multiple-element precues
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Consciousness and Cognition 8 (4):510-528 (1999)
Endogenous and exogenous processes of attention have been inferred with different types of precues used in allocation of attention to a target location. In the present research, a comparison was made between the typical peripheral single-element precue (SEP), a central precue, and a multiple-element precue (MEP) in order to further understanding of the processes involved in allocation of attention. Two precues were used on each trial in these experiments. An abrupt-onset precue appeared with an SEP, an MEP, or a central precue and was followed 50 or 300 ms later by a screen containing a target and two distractor characters. The abrupt-onset precue and the other precue each could be valid or invalid in indicating the location of the target, as in the study by Juola, Koshino, and Warner (1995). Response times to the targets showed that validity effects of the abrupt-onset precue and the MEP or central precue were additive, whereas those of the abrupt-onset precue and the SEP were interactive. These data suggest that, like a central precue, an MEP is an endogenous precue that guides conscious control of attention and has its attentional effects at a different processing level from an SEP, which is an exogenous precue and may compete for attentional resources with an abrupt-onset precue.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
M. I. Posner (1980). Orienting of Attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 32 (1):3-25.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Timothy Lane & C. M. Yang (2010). The Threshold of Wakefulness, the Experience of Control, and Theory Development. Consciousness and Cognition 19 (4):1095-1096.
T. Kawabe, Y. Yamada & K. Miura (2007). How an Abrupt Onset Cue Can Release Motion-Induced Blindness. Consciousness and Cognition 16 (2):374-380.
David LaBerge, L. Auclair & E. Sieroff (2000). Preparatory Attention: Experiment and Theory. Consciousness and Cognition 9 (3):396-434.
Shruti Baijal & Narayanan Srinivasan (2009). Types of Attention Matter for Awareness: A Study with Color Afterimages. Consciousness and Cognition 18 (4):1039-1048.
Vasudevi Reddy (2005). Before the `Third Element': Understanding Attention to Self. In Naomi Eilan, Christoph Hoerl, Teresa McCormack & Johannes Roessler (eds.), Joint Attention: Communication and Other Minds. Issues in Philosophy and Psychology. Oxford University Press 85--109.
B. Fischer & H. Weber (1997). Two Attentional Components for Two Purposes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (4):770-771.
Wa James Tam (1999). Ocular Disengagement Inhibited by Target Onset in Periphery? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):698-698.
Arthur F. Kramer, David E. Irwin, Jan Theeuwes & Sowon Hahn (1999). Oculomotor Capture by Abrupt Onsets Reveals Concurrent Programming of Voluntary and Involuntary Saccades. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):689-690.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #359,245 of 1,724,890 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #349,164 of 1,724,890 )
How can I increase my downloads?