Stimulus-response compatible orienting and the effect of an action not taken: Perception delayed is automaticity denied

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 271-275

  Besner, Derek ^a   Risko, Evan F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 23744488950     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03196371     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. BAUER, B., & BESNER, D. (1997). Processing in the Stroop task: Mental set as a determinant of performance. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51, 61-68.
2. BESNER, D., & CARE, S. (2003). A paradigm for exploring what the mind does while deciding what it should do. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 311-320.
3. BROWN, M. S., ROBERTS, M. A., & BESNER, D. (2001). Semantic processing in visual word recognition: Activation blocking and domain specificity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 778-784.
4. BROWN, T. L., GORE, C. L., & CARR, T. H. (2002). Visual attention and word recognition in Stroop color naming: Is word recognition "automatic"? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 220-240.
5. FROST, R. (2003). The robustness of phonological effects in fast priming. In S. Kinoshita & S. J. Lupker (Eds.), Masked priming: The state of the art (pp. 173-191). New York: Psychology Press.
6. KORNBLUM, S., HASBROUCQ, T., & OSMAN, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility - a model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270.
7. LOGAN, G. D., & BUNDESEN, C. (2003). Clever homunculus: Is there an endogenous act of control in the explicit task cuing procedure? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 575-599.
8. NEELY, J. H., & KAHAN, T. A. (2001). Is semantic activation automatic? A critical re-evaluation. In H. L. Roediger III, J. S. Nairne, I. Neath, & A. M. Surprenant (Eds.), The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder (pp. 69-93). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
9. ORIET, C., & JOLICŒUR, P. (2003). Absence of perceptual processing during reconfiguration of task set. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 1036-1049.
10. PASHLER, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220-244.
11. POSNER, M. I., & SNYDER, C. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola Symposium (pp. 55-85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. RAZ, A., SHAPIRO, T., FAN, J., & POSNER, M. I. (2002). Hypnotic suggestion and the modulation of Stroop interference. Archives of General Psychiatry, 59, 1155-1161.
13. ROGERS, R. D., & MONSELL, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207-231.
14. SCHNEIDER, W. (1988). Micro Experimental Laboratory: An integrated system for IBM PC compatibles. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 20, 206-217.
15. SMITH, M. C., & BESNER, D. (2001). Modulating semantic feedback in visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 111-117.
16. STOLZ, J. A., & BESNER, D. (1998). Levels of representation in visual word recognition: A dissociation between morphological and semantic processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 1642-1655.
17. VAN SELST, M., & JOLICŒUR, P. (1994). A solution to the effect of sample size on outlier estimation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 631-650.