Attention and nontarget effects in the location-cuing paradigm

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 58, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 300-309

  Chastain, Garvin ^a   Cheal, Marylou ^b,c,d   Lyon, Don R ^b  

^a BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Univ of Dayton Research Institute   (United States)

^c ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; COLOR VISION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MOTIVATION; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; VISUAL FIELD;

ADULT; ATTENTION; COLOR PERCEPTION; CUES; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MOTIVATION; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 0030074341     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/bf03211883     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. BONNEL, A.-M., & MILLER, J. (1994). Attentional effects on concurrent psychophysical discriminations: Investigations of a sample-size model. Perception & Psychophysics, 55, 162-179.
2. CHEAL, M., & LYON, D. (1989). Attention effects on form discrimination at different eccentricities. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41A, 719-746.
3. CHEAL, M., & LYON, D. R. (1992). Attention in visual search: Multiple search classes. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, 113-138.
4. CHEAL, M., LYON, D. R., & GOTTLOB, L. R. (1994). A framework for understanding the allocation of attention in location-precued discrimination. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47A, 699-739.
5. ERIKSEN, C. W., & ST. JAMES, J. D. (1986). Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model. Perception & Psychophysics, 40, 225-240.
6. ERIKSEN, C. W., WEBB, J. M., & FOURNIER, L. R. (1990). How much processing do nonattended stimuli receive? Apparently very little, but... Perception & Psychophysics, 47, 477-488.
7. GOOLKASIAN, P., & GARVER, D. K. (1993). Evidence for processing letters at uncued locations. American Journal of Psychology, 108, 235-253.
8. GOTTLOB, L. R. (1995). Modeling sharing versus switching in visual attention. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University.
9. GOTTLOB, L. R., CHEAL, M., & LYON, D. R. (1995). Cue validity manipulation in a location-cuing task: Sharing versus switching models for attention. Manuscript submitted for publication.
10. JOHNSTON, W. A., & DARK, V. J. (1986). Selective attention. Annual Review of Psychology, 37, 43-75.
11. LABERGE, D., & BROWN, V. (1986). Variations in size of the visual field in which targets are presented: An attentional range effect. Perception & Psychophysics, 40, 188-200.
12. LABERGE, D., & BROWN, V. (1989). Theory of attentional operations in shape identification. Psychological Review, 96, 101-124.
13. MILLER, J. (1987). Priming is not necessary for selective-attention failures: Semantic effects of unattended, unprimed letters. Perception & Psychophysics, 41, 419-434.
14. PAQUET, L., & LORTIE, C. (1990). Evidence for early selection: Precuing target location reduces interference from same-category distractors. Perception & Psychophysics, 48, 382-388.
15. PASHLER, H., & BADGIO, P. C. (1985). Visual attention and stimulus identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 11, 105-121.
16. POSNER, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 3-25.
17. TODD, S., & KRAMER, A. F. (1994). Attentional misguidance in visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 56, 198-210.
18. WOLFE, J. M., CAVE, K. R., & FRANZEL, S. L. (1989). Guided search: An alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 15, 419-433.
19. WRIGHT, R. D., KATZ, A. N., & HUGHES, E. A. (1993). Inattention and the perception of visual features. Acta Psychologica, 83, 225-235.
20. YANTIS, S., & JOHNSTON, J. C. (1990). On the locus of visual selection: Evidence from focused attention tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 16, 135-149.