G. Francis and F. Hermens (2002) used computer simulations to claim that many current models of metacontrast masking can account for the findings of V. Di Lollo, J. T. Enns, and R. A. Rensink (2000). They also claimed that notions of reentrant processing are not necessary because all of V. Di Lollo et al. 's data can be explained by feed-forward models. The authors show that G. Francis and F. Hermens's claims are vitiated by inappropriate modeling of attention and by ignoring important aspects of V. Di Lollo et al. 's results
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.131.4.594
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,077
External links

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

Evidence for an Interruption Theory of Backward Masking.Terry J. Spencer & Richard Shuntich - 1970 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 85 (2):198.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

A Uniform Logic of Information Dynamics.Wesley H. Holliday, Tomohiro Hoshi & Thomas F. Icard - 2012 - In Thomas Bolander, Torben Braüner, Silvio Ghilardi & Lawrence Moss (eds.), Advances in Modal Logic 9. College Publications. pp. 348-367.


Added to PP index

Total views
23 ( #476,282 of 2,454,557 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,377 of 2,454,557 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes