Location-specific versus hemisphere-specific adaptation of processing selectivity

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 135-140

  Wendt, Mike ^a   Kluwe, Rainer H ^b   Vietze, Ina ^b  

^a HELMUT SCHMIDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; LEARNING; MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME;

ADULT; ATTENTION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; DOMINANCE, CEREBRAL; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME; REVERSAL LEARNING;

EID: 50949091398     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/PBR.15.1.135     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. BOTVINICK, M. M., BRAVER, T. S., BARCH, D. M., CARTER, C. S., & COHEN, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108, 624-652.
2. COHEN, A., FUCHS, A., BAR-SELA, A., BRUMBERG, Y., & MAGEN, H. (1999). Correlational cuing as a function of target complexity and target-flanker similarity. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 275-290.
3. CORBALLIS, P. M., & GRATTON, G. (2003). Independent control of processing strategies for different locations in the visual field. Biological Psychology, 64, 191-209.
4. CRUMP, M. J. C., GONG, Z., & MILLIKEN, B. (2006). The context-specific proportion congruent Stroop effect: Location as a contextual cue. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 316-321.
5. ERIKSEN, B. A., & ERIKSEN, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 143-149.
6. FERNANDEZ-DUQUE, D., & KNIGHT, M. B. (in press). Cognitive control: Dynamic, sustained, and voluntary influences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.
7. GRATTON, G., COLES, M. G. H., & DONCHIN, E. (1992). Optimizing the use of information: Strategic control of activation of responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121,480-506.
8. HOMMEL, B. (1994). Spontaneous decay of response code activation. Psychological Research, 56, 261-268.
9. HU ̈BNER, R. (1997). The effect of spatial frequency on global precedence and hemispheric differences. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 187-201.
10. JACOBY, L. L., LINDSAY, D. S., & HESSELS, S. (2003). Item-specific control of automatic processes: Stroop process dissociations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 638-644.
11. LOGAN, G. D., & ZBRODOFF, N. J. (1979). When it helps to be misled: Facilitative effects of increasing the frequency of conflicting stimuli in a Stroop-like task. Memory & Cognition, 7, 166-174.
12. MILLER, J. (1987). Priming is not necessary for selective-attention failures: Semantic effects of unattended, unprimed letters. Perception & Psychophysics, 41, 419-434.
13. OLDFIELD, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologic, 9, 97-113.
14. STURMER, B., LEUTHOLD, H., SOETENS, E., SCHROTER, H., & SOM-MER, W. (2002). Control over location-based response activation in the Simon task: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 28, 1345-1363.
15. TZELGOV, J., HENIK, A., & BERGER, J. (1992). Controlling Stroop effects by manipulating expectations for color words. Memory & Cognition, 20, 727-735.
16. YOVEL, G., YOVEL, I., & LEVY, J. (2001). Hemispheric asymmetries for global and local visual perception: Effects of stimulus and task factors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 27, 1369-1385.
17. ZAIDEL, E., CLARKE, J. M., & SUYENOBU, B. (1990). Hemispheric independence: A paradigm case for cognitive neuroscience. In A. B. Scheibel & A. F. Wechsler (Eds.), Neurobiology of higher cognitive function (pp. 297-355). New York: Guilford.