Is size perception based on monocular distance cues computed automatically?

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 751-754

  Goldfarb, Liat ^a   Tzelgov, Joseph ^a  

^a BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 31044450691     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03196768     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. BARGH, J. A. (1989). Conditional automaticity: Varieties of automatic influence in social perception and cognition. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 3-51). New York: Guilford.
2. BARGH, J. A. (1992). The ecology of automaticity: Toward establishing the conditions needed to produce automatic processing effects. American Journal of Psychology, 105, 181-199.
3. BAUER, B., & BESNER, D. (1997). Mental set as a determinant of processing in the Stroop task. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51, 61-68.
4. BERBAUM, K., THARP, D., & MROCZEK, K. (1983). Depth perception of surfaces in pictures: Looking for conventions of depiction in Pandora's box. Perception, 12, 5-20.
5. BESNER, D., & COLTHEART, M. (1979). Ideographic and alphabetic processing in skilled reading of English. Neuropsychologia, 17, 467-472.
6. BRUNO, N., & CUTTING, J. E. (1988). Minimodularity and the perception of layout. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 161-170.
7. DURGIN, F. H. (2000). The reverse Stroop effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 121-125.
8. EPSTEIN, W. (1982). Percept-percept coupling. Perception, 11, 75-83.
9. GIBSON, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
10. HENIK, A., & TZELGOV, J. (1982). Is three greater than five: The relation between physical and semantic size in comparison tasks. Memory & Cognition, 10, 389-395.
11. LOGAN, G. D. (1992). Attention and preattention in theories of automaticity. American Journal of Psychology, 105, 317-339.
12. MACLEOD, C. M. (1991). Halfa century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163-203.
13. MICHAELS, C. F., & CARELLO, C. (1981). Direct perception. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
14. MOORE, C., & EGETH, H. (1997). Perception without attention: Evidence of grouping under conditions of inattention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 23, 339-352.
15. NORMAN, J. (1980). Direct and indirect perception of size. Perception & Psychophysics, 28, 306-314.
16. POSNER, M. I., & SNYDER, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium (pp. 55-85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. 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.
18. ROBERTSON, L. C., & KIM, M. S. (1999). Effects of perceived space on spatial attention. Psychological Science, 10, 76-79.
19. ROCK, I. (1983). The logic of perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. ROCK, I. (1997). Indirect perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. SHIFFRIN, R. M., & SCHNEIDER, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127-190.
22. STROOP, J. R. (1935). Studies in interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643-661.
23. TZELGOV, J. (1997). Specifying the relations between automaticity and consciousness: A theoretical note. Consciousness & Cognition, 6, 441-451.
24. TZELGOV, J., YEHENE, V., KOTLER, L., & ALON, A. (2000). Automatizing algorithmic processing: The learning of linear ordering relations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 103-120.