Spatial Stroop and spatial orienting: The role of onset versus offset cues

Psychological Research

Volumn 74, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 277-290

  Luo, Chunming ^a,b   Lupiáñez, Juan ^c   Fu, Xiaolan ^a   Weng, Xuchu ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF PSYCHOLOGY   (China)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHINESE ACADEMY OF SCIENCES   (China)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Offset cue; Onset cue; Onset offset cue; Spatial Stroop effect

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; CONFLICT; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; STROOP TEST;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTENTION; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); CUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; SPACE PERCEPTION; STROOP TEST;

EID: 77950296272     PISSN: 03400727     EISSN: 14302772     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-009-0253-z     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Bartolomeo, P. (2007). Visual neglect. Current Opinion in Neurology, 20(4), 381-386.
2. Birmingham, E., & Pratt, J. (2005). Examining inhibition of return with onset and offset cues in the multiple cueing paradigm. Acta Psychologica, 118, 101-121.
3. Boot, W. R., Kramer, A. F., & Peterson, M. S. (2005). Oculomotor consequences of abrupt onsets and offsets: Onsets dominate oculomotor capture. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 910-928.
4. Brockmole, J. R., & Henderson, J. M. (2005). Object appearance, disappearance, and attention prioritization in real-world scenes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 1061-1067.
5. Callejas, A., Lupiáñez, J., Funes, M. J., & Tudela, P. (2005). Modulations among the alerting, orienting and executive control networks. Experimental Brain Research, 167(1), 27-37.
6. Castel, A., Chasteen, A. L., Scialfa, C. T., & Pratt, J. (2003). Adult age differences in the time course of inhibition of return. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 58, 256-259.
7. Chica, A., Lupiáñez, J., Rossi, A., & Riggio, L. (submitted). Differential cuing effects for onset and offset cues under identical task sets.
8. Danziger, S., Kingstone, A., & Ward, R. (2001). Environmentally defined frames of reference: Their sensitivity to spatial cues and attention, and their time course. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 494-503.
9. Funes, M. J., & Lupiáñez, J. (2003). La teoría atencional de Posner: Una tarea para medir las funciones atencionales de orientación, alerta y control cognitivo y la interacción entre ellas. Psicothema, 15, 260-266.
10. Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (2005). The role of spatial attention and other processes on the magnitude and time course of cueing effects. Cognitive Processing-International Quarterly of Cognitive Science, 6, 98-116.
11. Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (2007). Separate mechanisms recruited by exogenous and endogenous spatial cues: evidence from a spatial Stroop paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33(2), 248-262.
12. Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (2008). The modulation of exogenous spatial cueing on spatial Stroop interference: evidence of a set for "cue-target event segregation". Psicológica, 29, 65-95.
13. Gawryszewski, L. G., Thomaz, T. G., Machado-Pinheiro, W., & Sant'Anna, A. N. (1994). Onset and offset of a visual cue have different effects on manual reaction time to a visual target. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 27, 67-73.
14. Hommel, B. (1993a). The role of attention for the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 55, 208-222.
15. Hommel, B. (1993b). The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: evidence for a temporal overlap. Psychological Research, 55, 280-290.
16. Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5(1-2), 183-216.
17. Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(11), 494-500.
18. Ivanoff, J., Klein, R. M., & Lupiáñez, J. (2002). Inhibition of return interacts with the Simon effect: an omnibus analysis and its implications. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 318-327.
19. Jonides, J., & Yantis, S. (1988). Uniqueness of abrupt visual onset in capturing attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 43, 346-354.
20. Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., & Gibbs, B. (1992). The reviewing of object files: object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 175-219.
21. Klein, R. M. (2000). Inhibition of return. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 138-147.
22. Lu, C.-H., & Proctor, R. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: a review of the Simon effect and congruency effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 174-207.
23. Luo, C., Lupiáñez, J., Funes, M. J., & Fu, X. (2009). Modulation of spatial Stroop by object-based attention but not by space-based attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology.
24. Lupiáñez, J., & Chica, A. B. (submitted). Inhibition of return and attentional disengagement.
25. Lupiáñez, J., & Funes, M. J. (2005). Peripheral spatial cues modulate spatial Stroop interference: analyzing the "locus" of the cueing modulation. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 727-752.
26. Lupiáñez, J., Milan, E. G., Tornay, F. J., Madrid, E., & Tudela, P. (1997). Does IOR occur in discrimination tasks? Yes, it does, but later. Perception and Psychophysics, 59(8), 1241-1254.
27. Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (1999). Inhibition of return and the attentional set for integrating versus differentiating information. The Journal o f General Psychology, 126(4), 392-418.
28. Lupiáñez, J., Milliken, B., Solano, C., Weaver, B., & Tipper, S. P. (2001). On the strategic modulation of the time course of facilitation and inhibition of return. The Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 54(3), 753-773.
29. Lupiáñez, J., Ruz, M., Funes, M. J., & Milliken, B. (2007). The manifestation of attentional capture: facilitation or IOR depending on task demands. Psychological Research, 71(1), 77-91.
30. Posner, M. I., & Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X: control of language processes (pp. 531-556). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
31. Posner, M. I., Rafal, R. D., Choate, L. S., & Vaughan, J. (1985). Inhibition of return: neural basis and function. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2, 211-228.
32. Pratt, J., & Hirshhorn, M. (2003). Examining the time course of facilitation and inhibition with simultaneous onset and offset cues. Psychological Research, 67, 261-265.
33. Pratt, J., & McAuliffe, J. (2001). The effects of onsets and offsets on visual attention. Psychological Research, 65, 185-191.
34. Pratt, J., Theeuwes, J., & Donk, M. (2007). Offsets and prioritizing the selection of new elements in search displays: more evidence for attentional capture in the preview effect. Visual Cognition, 15, 133-148.
35. Pratt, J., & Trottier, L. (2005). Pro-saccades and anti-saccades to onset and offset targets. Vision Research, 45, 765-774.
36. Proctor, R. W., Lu, C. H., & van Zandt, T. (1992). Enhancement of the Simon effect by response precuing. Acta Psychologica, 81, 53-74.
37. Rastelli, F., Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., Duret, C., & Bartolomeo, P. (2008). Left visual neglect: is the disengage deficit Space- or object-based? Experimental Brain Research, 187(3), 439-446.
38. Reuter-Lorenz, P. A., Jha, A. P., & Rosenquist, J. N. (1996). What is inhibited in inhibition of return? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, 367-378.
39. Riggio, L., Bello, A., & Umilta, C. (1998). Inhibitory and facilitatory effects of cue onset and offset. Psychological Research, 61, 107-118.
40. Rubichi, S., Nicoletti, R., Iani, C., & Umilta, C. (1997). The Simon effect occurs in relation to the direction of an attention shift. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 1353-1364.
41. Samuel, A. G., & Weiner, S. K. (2001). Attentional consequences of object appearance and disappearance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(6), 1433-1451.
42. Stoffer, T. H. (1991). Attentional focusing and spatial stimulus-response compatibility. Psychological Research, 53, 127-135.
43. Taylor, T. L., & Ivanoff, J. (2005). Inhibition of return and repetition priming effects in localization and discrimination tasks. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 75-89.
44. Verfaellie, M., Bowers, D., & Heilman, K. M. (1988). Attentional factors in the occurrence of stimulus-response compatibility effects. Neuropsychologia, 26, 435-444.
45. Vingilis-Jaremko, L., Ferber, S., & Pratt, J. (2008). Better late than never: how onsets and offsets influence prior entry and exit. Psychological Research, 72, 443-450.
46. Yantis, S., & Jonides, J. (1996). Attentional capture by abrupt onsets: New perceptual objects or visual masking? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 1505-1513.
47. Zimba, L. D., & Brito, C. F. (1995). Attention precuing and Simon effects: a test of the attention-coding account of the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 58, 102-118.