Visual attention and coactivation of response decisions for features from different dimensions

Psychological Science

Volumn 13, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 361-369

  Feintuch, Uri ^a   Cohen, Asher ^a  

^a HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COLOR VISION; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; PATTERN RECOGNITION; RANDOMIZATION; REACTION TIME; VISION;

ATTENTION; COLOR PERCEPTION; DECISION MAKING; FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; RANDOM ALLOCATION; REACTION TIME; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 0036632764     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9280.00465     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Allport, D.A. (1989). Visual attention. In M.I. Posner (Ed.), Foundations of cognitive science (Vol. 2, pp. 631-682). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2. Cohen, A. (1993). Asymmetries in visual search for conjunctive targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 775-797.
3. Cohen, A., & Feintuch, U. (2002). The Dimensional-Action system: A distinct visual system. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.), Attention & performance XIX (pp. 587-608). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
4. Cohen, A., & Magen, H. (1999). Intra- and cross-dimensional visual search for single feature targets. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 291-307.
5. Cohen, A., & Shoup, R. (1997). Perceptual dimensional constraints on response selection processes. Cognitive Psychology, 32, 128-181.
6. Cohen, A., & Shoup, R. (2000). Response selection processes for conjunctive targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 391-411.
7. Duncan, J. (1984). Selective attention and the organization of visual information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 501-517.
8. Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G.W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433-458.
9. Duncan, J., & Nimmo-Smith, I. (1996). Objects and attributes in divided attention: Surface and boundary systems. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 1076-1084.
10. Egly, R., Driver, J., & Rafal, R.D. (1994). Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: Evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 161-177.
11. Eriksen, C.W., & Yeh, Y. (1985). Allocation of attention in the visual field. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 583-597.
12. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq. T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive bias for stimulus-response compatibility - a model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270.
13. Kramer, A.F., & Jacobson, A. (1991). Perceptual organization and focused attention: The role of objects and proximity in visual processing. Perception & Psychophysics, 50, 267-284.
14. Kramer, A.F., Weber, T.A., & Watson, S.E. (1997). Object-based attentional selection: Grouped arrays or spatially invariant representations? Comment on Vecerra and Farah (1994). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 3-13.
15. Krummenacher, J., Muller, H.J., & Heller, D. (2001). Visual search for dimensionally redundant pop-out targets: Parallel-coactive processing of dimensions is location specific. Manuscript submitted for publication.
16. Krummenacher, J., Muller, H.J., & Heller, D. (in press). Visual search for dimensionally redundant pop-out targets: Evidence for parallel-coactive processing of dimensions. Perception & Psychophysics.
17. Kumada, T. (in press). Feature-based control of attention: Evidence for two forms of dimension weighting. Perception & Psychophysics.
18. Lavie, N. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance, 21, 451-468.
19. Miller, J. (1982). Divided attention: Evidence for coactivation with redundant signals. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 247-279.
20. Miller, J., & Lopes, A. (1988). Testing race models by estimating the smaller of two true mean or true median reaction times: An analysis of estimation bias. Perception & Psychophysics, 44, 513-524.
21. Mordkoff, J.T., & Yantis, S. (1991). An interactive race model of divided attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 520-538.
22. Mordkoff, J.T., & Yantis, S. (1993). Dividing attention between color and shape: Evidence for coactivation. Perception & Psychophysics, 53, 357-366.
23. Muller, H.J., & Rabbitt, P.M.A. (1989). Reflexive and voluntary orienting of visual attention: Time course of activation and resistance to interruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 315-330.
24. Posner, M.I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 3-25.
25. Prinzmetal, W., Amiri, H., Alien, K., & Edwards, T. (1998). Phenomenology of attention: 1. Color, location, orientation, and spatial frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 261-282.
26. Prinzmetal, W., Presti, D.E., & Posner, M.I. (1986). Does attention affect visual feature integration? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 12, 361-369.
27. Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. In W.G. Koster (Ed.), Attention and performance II (pp. 276-315). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
28. Treisman, A.M. (1986). Properties, parts and objects. In K. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance (pp. 1-70). New York: Wiley.
29. Treisman, A.M., & Sato, S. (1990). Conjunction search revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 459-478.
30. Tsal, Y., & Shalev, L. (1996). Inattention magnifies perceived length: The attentional receptive field hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 233-243.
31. Wolfe, J.M. (1994). Guided search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 202-238.
32. Yantis, S., & Johnston, J.C. (1990). On the locus of visual selection: Evidence from focused attention tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 135-149.
33. Yeshurun, Y., & Carrasco, M. (1998). Attention improves or impairs visual performance by enhancing spatial resolution. Nature, 396, 72-75.