Even frequent and expected words are not identified without spatial attention

Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

Volumn 72, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 973-988

  Lien, Mei Ching ^a   Ruthruff, Eric ^b   Kouchi, Scott ^a   Lachter, Joel ^c  

^a OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

^c NASA AMES RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; DEPTH PERCEPTION; HUMAN; LINGUISTICS; PAIRED ASSOCIATE LEARNING; PERCEPTION; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; READING; RECALL; SEMANTICS; STROOP TEST; VISION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTENTION; CUES; HUMANS; MENTAL RECALL; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PAIRED-ASSOCIATE LEARNING; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS; SPACE PERCEPTION; STROOP TEST; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 77955287234     PISSN: 19433921     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/APP.72.4.973     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Allport, A. (1980). Attention and performance. In G. Claxton (Ed.), Cognitive psychology: New directions (pp. 112-153). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
2. Altarriba, J., Kambe, G., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2001). Semantic codes are not used in integrating information across eye fixations in reading: Evidence from fluent Spanish-English bilinguals. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 875-890.
3. Andersen, S. K., Müller, M. M., & Hillyard, S. A. (2009). Colorselective attention need not be mediated by spatial attention. Journal of Vision, 9(6, Art. 2), 1-7.
4. Ballard, D. H. (1991). Animate vision. Artificial Intelligence, 48, 57-86.
5. Besner, D., Stolz, J. A., & Boutilier, C. (1997). The Stroop effect and the myth of automaticity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 221-225.
6. 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.
7. Brown, T. L., Roos-Gilbert, L., & Carr, T. H. (1995). Automaticity and word perception: Evidence from Stroop and Stroop dilution effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 1395-1411.
8. Chiappe, P. R., Smith, M. C., & Besner, D. (1996). Semantic priming in visual word recognition: Activation blocking and domains of processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 249-253.
9. Cho, Y.-S., Lien, M.-C., & Proctor, R. W. (2006). Stroop dilution depends on the nature of the color carrier but not on its location. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 32, 826-839.
10. Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204-256.
11. Conway, A. R. A., Cowan, N., & Bunting, M. F. (2001). The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: The importance of working memory capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 331-335.
12. Dark, V. J., Johnston, W. A., Myles-Worsley, M., & Farah, M. J. (1985). Levels of selection and capacity limits. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 472-497.
13. Finkbeiner, M., & Forster, K. I. (2008). Attention, intention, and domainspecific processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 59-64.
14. Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 1030-1044.
15. Forster, K. I., & Davis, C. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 10, 680-698.
16. Fuentes, L. J., Carmona, E., Agis, I. F., & Catena, A. (1994). The role of the anterior attention system in semantic processing of both foveal and parafoveal words. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 6, 17-25.
17. Fuentes, L. J., & Tudela, P. (1992). Semantic processing of foveally and parafoveally presented words in a lexical decision task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45A, 299-322.
18. Fuster, J. M. (1990). Inferotemporal units in selective visual attention and short-term memory. Journal of Neurophysiology, 64, 681-697.
19. Fuster, J. M., & Jervey, J. P. (1981). Inferotemporal neurons distinguish and retain behaviorally relevant features of visual stimuli. Science, 212, 952-955.
20. Gatti, S. V., & Egeth, H. E. (1978). Failure of spatial selectivity in vision. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 11, 181-184.
21. Haenny, P. E., Maunsell, J. H., & Schiller, P. H. (1988). State dependent activity in monkey visual cortex. II. Retinal and extraretinal factors in V4. Experimental Brain Research, 69, 245-259.
22. Heil, M., Rolke, N., & Pecchinenda, A. (2004). Automatic semantic activation is no myth: Semantic context effects on the N400 in the letter-search task in the absence of response time effects. Psychological Science, 15, 852-857.
23. Kahneman, D., & Chajczyk, D. (1983). Tests of the automaticity of reading: Dilution of Stroop effects by color-irrelevant stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 9, 497-509.
24. Kirsner, K., & Speelman, P. (1996). Skill acquisition and repetition priming: One principle, many processes? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 563-575.
25. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293-323.
26. Lachter, J., Forster, K. I., & Ruthruff, E. (2004). Forty-five years after Broadbent (1958): Still no identification without attention. Psychological Review, 111, 880-913.
27. Lachter, J., Ruthruff, E., Lien, M.-C., & McCann, R. S. (2008). Is attention needed for word identification? Evidence from the Stroop paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 950-955.
28. Lien, M.-C., Ruthruff, E., Cornett, L., Goodin, Z., & Allen, P. A. (2008). On the nonautomaticity of visual word processing: Electrophysiological evidence that word processing requires central attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 34, 751-773.
29. MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163-203.
30. Maunsell, J. H. R., Nealey, T. A., Sclar, G., & DePriest, D. D. (1989). Representation of extraretinal information in monkey visual cortex. In D. Lam (Ed.), Proceedings of the Retinal Research Foundation Symposium (pp. 223-235). Woodlands, TX: Portfolio.
31. McCann, R. S., Folk, C. L., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). The role of spatial attention in visual word processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 1015-1029.
32. Meyer, D. E., & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1971). Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90, 227-234.
33. Miyashita, Y., & Chang, H. S. (1988). Neuronal correlate of pictorial short-term memory in the primate temporal cortex. Nature, 331, 68-70.
34. Moray, N. (1959). Attention in dichotic listening: Affective cues and the influence of instructions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 11, 56-60.
35. Neely, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In D. Besner & G. W. Humphreys (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Visual word recognition (pp. 264-336). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. 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: APA.
37. Rayner, K., White, S. J., Kambe, G., Miller, B., & Liversedge, S. P. (2003). On the processing of meaning from parafoveal vision during eye fixations in reading. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind's eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 213-234). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
38. Roberts, M. A., & Besner, D. (2005). Stroop dilution revisited: Evidence for domain-specific, limited-capacity processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 31, 3-13.
39. Rossi, A. F., & Paradiso, M. A. (1995). Feature-specific effects of selective visual attention. Vision Research, 35, 621-634.
40. Siéroff, E., & Posner, M. I. (1988). Cueing spatial attention during processing of words and letter strings in normals. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 5, 451-472.
41. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1981). The effect of sentence context on ongoing word recognition: Tests of a two-process theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 7, 658-672.
42. Stolz, J. A., & Besner, D. (1999). On the myth of automatic semantic activation in reading. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 61-65.
43. Stolz, J. A., & McCann, R. S. (2000). Visual word recognition: Reattending to the role of spatial attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 1320-1331.
44. Stolz, J. A., & Neely, J. H. (1995). When target degradation does and does not enhance semantic context effects in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 596-611.
45. Stolz, J. A., & Stevanovski, B. (2004). Interactive activation in visual word recognition: Constraints imposed by the joint effect of spatial attention and semantics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 30, 1064-1076.
46. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643-662.
47. Treisman, A. M. (1960). Contextual cues in selective listening. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 242-248.