Different effects of the two types of spatial pre-cueing: What precisely is "attention" in di Lollo's and Enns' substitution masking theory?

Psychological Research

Volumn 71, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 634-640

  Luiga, I ^a   Bachmann, T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TARTU   (Estonia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; DEPTH PERCEPTION; HUMAN; PERCEPTION; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY;

ATTENTION; CUES; HUMANS; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; SPACE PERCEPTION;

EID: 34548604794     PISSN: 03400727     EISSN: 14302772     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-006-0052-8     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Bachmann, T. (1988). Time course of the subjective contrast enhancement for a second stimulus in successively paired above-threshold transient forms: Perceptual retouch instead of forward masking. Vision Research, 28, 1255-1261.
2. Bachmann, T. (1994). Psychophysiology of visual masking: The fine structure of conscious experience. Commack, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
3. Bachmann, T. (2005). Object substitution and its relation to other forms of visual masking: Reply to James Enns. Vision Research, 45, 381-385.
4. Bouma, H. (1970). Interaction effects in parafoveal letter recognition. Nature, 226, 177-178.
5. Breitmeyer, B. G. (1984). Visual masking: An integrative approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
6. Cohene, L. S., & Bechtoldt, H. P. (1974). Visual recognition as a function of stimulus offset asynchrony and duration. Perception & Psychophysics, 15, 221-226.
7. Di Lollo, V., Enns, J. T., & Rensink, R. A. (2000). Competition for consciousness among visual events: The psychophysics of re-entrant visual processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 481-507.
8. Enns, J. T. (2004). Object substitution and its relation to other forms of visual masking. Vision Research, 44, 1321-1331.
9. Enns, J. T., & Di Lollo, V. (1997). Object substitution: A new form of masking in unattended visual locations. Psychological Science, 8, 135-139.
10. Jiang, Y., & Chun, M. M. (2001). Asymmetric object substitution masking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 895-918.
11. Lleras, A., & Moore, C. M. (2003). When the target becomes the mask: Using apparent motion to isolate the object-level component of object substitution masking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 106-120.
12. Müller, 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.
13. Neill, W. T., Hutchison, K. A., & Graves, D. F. (2002). Masking by object substitution: Dissociation of masking and cueing effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 682-694.
14. Pashler, H. (1998). Attention. Hove: Psychology Press.
15. Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 3-25.
16. Tata, M., & Giaschi, D. (2004). Warning: Attending to a mask may be hazardous to your perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 262-268.
17. Turvey, M. T. (1973). On peripheral and central processes in vision: Inferences from an information-processing analysis of masking with patterned stimuli. Psychological Review, 80 (1), 1-52.
18. Van der Heijden, A. H. C. (1992). Selective attention in vision. London: Routledge.
19. Watson, D. G., Humphreys, G. W, & Olivers, C. N. L. (2003). Visual marking: Using time in visual selection. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7 (4), 180-186.