The multiple-weighting-systems hypothesis: Theory and empirical support

Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

Volumn 74, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 540-552

  Rangelov, Dragan ^a   Müller, Hermann J ^a,b   Zehetleitner, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Dimension repetition effect; Dimensional weighting; Multiple weighting systems; Task switching

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COLOR VISION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; REACTION TIME; RECEPTIVE FIELD; SYSTEMS THEORY;

ADULT; ATTENTION; COLOR PERCEPTION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; FIELD DEPENDENCE-INDEPENDENCE; HUMANS; MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; REACTION TIME; SYSTEMS THEORY;

EID: 84857717586     PISSN: 19433921     EISSN: 1943393X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-011-0251-2     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Becker, S. I. (2008). Can intertrial effects of features and dimensions be explained by a single theory? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1417-1440. doi: 10. 1037/a0011386.
2. Becker, S. I. (2010). Testing a postselectional account of across-dimension switch costs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 853-861. doi: 10. 3758/PBR. 17. 6. 853.
3. Cohen, A., & Magen, H. (1999). Intra- and cross-dimensional visual search for single-feature targets. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 291-307.
4. Cohen, A., & Shoup, R. (1997). Perceptual dimensional constraints in response selection processes. Cognitive Psychology, 32, 128-181. doi: 10. 1006/cogp. 1997. 0648.
5. Cohen, A., & Shoup, R. (2000). Response selection processes for conjunctive targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 391-411.
6. Druey, M. D., & Hübner, R. (2008). Response inhibition under task switching: Its strength depends on the amount of task-irrelevant response activation. Psychological Research, 72, 515-527. doi: 10. 1007/s00426-007-0127-1.
7. Fecteau, J. H. (2007). Priming of pop-out depends upon the current goals of observers. Journal of Vision, 7(6, Art. 1), 1, 1-11. doi: 10. 1167/7. 6. 1.
8. Feintuch, U., & Cohen, A. (2002). Visual attention and coactivation of response decisions for features from different dimensions. Psychological Science, 13, 361-369.
9. Found, A., & Müller, H. J. (1996). Searching for unknown feature targets on more than one dimension: Investigating a "dimension-weighting" account. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 88-101.
10. Gade, M., & Koch, I. (2007). The influence of overlapping response sets on task inhibition. Memory & Cognition, 35, 603-609. doi: VL-35.
11. Gramann, K., Töllner, T., & Müller, H. J. (2010). Dimension-based attention modulates early visual processing. Psychophysiology, 47, 968-978. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1469-8986. 2010. 00998. x.
12. Koch, I., Gade, M., Schuch, S., & Philipp, A. M. (2010). The role of inhibition in task switching: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 1-14. doi: 10. 3758/PBR. 17. 1. 1.
13. Krummenacher, J., Grubert, A., & Müller, H. J. (2010). Inter-trial and redundant-signals effects in visual search and discrimination tasks: Separable pre-attentive and post-selective effects. Vision Research, 50, 1382-1395. doi: 10. 1016/j. visres. 2010. 04. 006.
14. Logan, G. D., & Schneider, D. W. (2006). Priming or executive control? Associative priming of cue encoding increases "switch costs" in the explicit task-cuing procedure. Memory & Cognition, 34, 1250-1259.
15. Logan, G. D., Schneider, D. W., & Bundesen, C. (2007). Still clever after all these years: Searching for the homunculus in explicitly cued task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 978-994. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 33. 4. 978.
16. Mayr, U. (2001). Age differences in the selection of mental sets: The role of inhibition, stimulus ambiguity, and response-set overlap. Psychology and Aging, 16, 96-109. doi: 10. 1037/0882-7974. 16. 1. 96.
17. Mayr, U., & Keele, S. W. (2000). Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 4-26.
18. Meeter, M., & Olivers, C. N. L. (2006). Intertrial priming stemming from ambiguity: A new account of priming in visual search. Visual Cognition, 13, 202-222. doi: 10. 1080/13506280500277488.
19. Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1423-1442.
20. Mortier, K., Theeuwes, J., & Starreveld, P. (2005). Response selection modulates visual search within and across dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 542-557. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 31. 3. 542.
21. Müller, H. J., Heller, D., & Ziegler, J. (1995). Visual search for singleton feature targets within and across feature dimensions. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 1-17.
22. Müller, H. J., & Krummenacher, J. (2006a). Locus of dimension weighting: Preattentive or postselective? Visual Cognition, 14, 490-513.
23. Müller, H. J., & Krummenacher, J. (2006b). Visual search and selective attention. Visual Cognition, 14, 389-410.
24. Olivers, C. N. L., & Humphreys, G. W. (2003). Attentional guidance by salient feature singletons depends on intertrial contingencies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 650-657.
25. Olivers, C. N. L., & Meeter, M. (2006). On the dissociation between compound and present/absent tasks in visual search: Intertrial priming is ambiguity driven. Visual Cognition, 13, 1-28.
26. Olivers, C. N. L., & Meeter, M. (2008). Feature priming in visual search does not depend on the dimensional context. Visual Cognition, 16, 785-803. doi: 10. 1080/13506280701428658.
27. Rangelov, D., Müller, H. J., & Zehetleitner, M. (2011a). Dimension-specific intertrial priming effects are task-specific: Evidence for multiple weighting systems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 100-114. doi: 10. 1037/a0020364.
28. Rangelov, D., Müller, H. J., & Zehetleitner, M. (2011b). Independent dimension-weighting mechanisms for visual selection and stimulus identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1369-1382. doi: 10. 1037/a0024265.
29. Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207-231.
30. Schneider, D. W., & Logan, G. D. (2009). Selecting a response in task switching: Testing a model of compound cue retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 122-136. doi: 10. 1037/a0013744.
31. Töllner, T., Gramann, K., Muller, H. J., Kiss, M., & Eimer, M. (2008). Electrophysiological markers of visual dimension changes and response changes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 34, 531-542. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 34. 3. 531.