Attentional load modulates mislocalization of moving stimuli, but does not eliminate the error

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 11, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 848-853

  Kerzel, Dirk ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; EYE FIXATION; HUMAN; MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; VISION;

ATTENTION; FIXATION, OCULAR; HUMANS; MOTION PERCEPTION; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 19644364432     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03196711     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. FREYD, J. J., & FINKE, R. A. (1984). Representational momentum. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 10, 126-132.
2. FREYD, J. J., & JOHNSON, J. Q. (1987). Probing the time course of representational momentum. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning. Memory, & Cognition, 13, 259-268.
3. HAYES, A. E., & FREYD, J. J. (2002). Representational momentum when attention is divided. Visual Cognition, 9, 8-27.
4. HUBBARD, T. L. (1995). Environmental invariants in the representation of motion: Implied dynamics and representational momentum, gravity, friction, and centripetal force. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 322-338.
5. HUBBARD, T. L. (1996). Representational momentum, centripetal force, and curvilinear impetus. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 1049-1060.
6. HUBBARD, T. L., & MOTES, M. A. (2002). Does representational momentum reflect a distortion of the length or the endpoint of a trajectory? Cognition, 82, B89-B99.
7. KERZEL, D. (2000). Eye movements and visible persistence explain the mislocalization of the final position of a moving target. Vision Research, 40, 3703-3715.
8. KERZEL, D. (2002a). Different localization of motion onset with pointing and relative judgements. Experimental Brain Research, 145, 340-350.
9. KERZEL, D. (2002b). Memory for the position of stationary objects: Disentangling foveal bias and memory averaging. Vision Research, 42, 159-167.
10. KERZEL, D. (2003a). Attention maintains mental extrapolation of target position: Irrelevant distractors eliminate forward displacement after implied motion. Cognition, 88, 109-131.
11. KERZEL, D. (2003b). Mental extrapolation of target position is strongest with weak motion signals and motor responses. Vision Research, 43, 2623-2635.
12. KIRSCHFELD, K., & KAMMER, T. (1999). The Fröhlich effect: A consequence of the interaction of visual focal attention and metacontrast. Vision Research, 39, 3702-3709.
13. KOZHEVNIKOV, M., & HEGARTY, M. (2001). Impetus beliefs as default heuristics: Dissociation between explicit and implicit knowledge about motion. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 439-453.
14. MÜSSELER, J., & ASCHERSLEBEN, G. (1998). Localizing the first position of a moving stimulus: The Fröhlich effect and an attention-shifting explanation. Perception & Psychophysics, 60, 683-695.
15. SHETH, B. R., & SHIMOJO, S. (2001). Compression of space in visual memory. Vision Research, 41, 329-341.
16. THORNTON, I. M. (2002). The onset repulsion effect. Spatial Vision, 15, 219-244.
17. VAN DER HEIJDEN, A. H., VAN DER GEEST, J. N., DE LEEUW, F., KRIKKE, K., & MÜSSELER, J. (1999). Sources of position-perception error for small isolated targets. Psychological Research, 62, 20-35.
18. WHITNEY, D., & CAVANAGH, P. (2002). Surrounding motion affects the perceived locations of moving stimuli. Visual Cognition, 9, 139-152.