The role of stimulus factors in making categorical and coordinate spatial judgments

Brain and Cognition

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 171-185

  Wilkinson, David ^a   Donnelly, Nick ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COGNITION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HANDEDNESS; HEMISPHERE; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LUMINANCE; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPATIAL ORIENTATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL STIMULATION;

EID: 0032915334     PISSN: 02782626     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/brcg.1999.1076     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Annett M. The binomial distribution of right, mixed and left handedness. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 19:1967;327-333.
2. Briggs G. G., Nebes R. D. Patterns of hand preference in a student population. Cortex. 11:1975;230-238.
3. Christman S. Effects of luminance and blur on hemispheric asymmetries in temporal integration. Neuropsychologia. 28:1990;261-274.
4. Coltheart M. Iconic memory and visible persistence. Perception and Psychophysics. 27:1980;183-228.
5. Cowin E. L., Hellige J. B. Categorical versus coordinate spatial processing: Effects of blurring and hemispheric asymmetry. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 6:1994;156-164.
6. Di Lollo V., Bischof W. F. Inverse-intensity effect in duration of visible persistence. Psychological Bulletin. 188:1995;2-237.
7. Haber R. W., Standing L. Direct estimates of the apparent duration of a flash. Canadian Journal of Psychology. 24:1970;216-229.
8. Hellige J. B., Michimata C. Categorisation versus distance: Hemispheric differences for processing spatial information. Memory and Cognition. 17:1989;770-776.
9. Kosslyn S. M. Seeing and imagining in the cerebral hemispheres: A computational approach. Psychological Review. 94:1987;148-175.
10. Kosslyn S. M., Chabris C. F., Marsolek C. J., Koenig O. Categorical versus coordinate spatial relations: Computational analysis and computer simulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 18:1992;562-577.
11. Kosslyn S. M., Koenig O., Barrett A., Cave C. B., Tang J., Gabrieli J. D. E. Evidence for two types of spatial representations: Hemispheric specialisation for categorical and coordinate relations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 15:1989;723-735.
12. Rybash J. M., Hoyer W. J. Hemispheric specialisation for categorical and coordinate spatial representations: A reappraisal. Memory and Cognition. 20:1992;271-276.
13. Sergent J. Role of contrast, letter case, and viewing conditions in a lateralized word naming task. Perception and Psychophysics. 35:1984;489-498.
14. Sergent J. Judgments of relative position and distance on representations of spatial relations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 91:1991;762-780.
15. Sperling G. The information available in brief visual presentations. Psychological Monographs. 74:1960.