The influence of cueing on attentional focus in perceptual decision making

Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

Volumn 76, Issue 8, 2014, Pages 2256-2275

  Yang, Cheng Ta ^a   Little, Daniel R ^b   Hsu, Ching Chun ^a  

^a NATIONAL CHENG KUNG UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Attention; Decision making; System factorial technology

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; VISION; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; ATTENTION; CUES; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84930512545     PISSN: 19433921     EISSN: 1943393X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-014-0709-0     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Blair, M. R., Watson, M. R., Walshe, R. C., & Maj, F. (2009). Extremely selective attention: Eye-tracking studies of the dynamic allocation of attention to stimulus features in categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 1196–1206. doi:10.1037/a0016272
2. Cohen, A. L., & Nosofsky, R. M. (2003). An extension of the exemplar-based random-walk model to separable-dimension stimuli. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 47, 150–165. doi:10.1016/S0022-2496(02)00031-7
3. Dzhafarov, E. N. (1999). Conditionally selective dependence of random variables on external factors. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 43, 123–157.
4. Eckstein, M. P., Pham, B. T., & Shimozaki, S. S. (2004). The footprints of visual attention during search with 100% valid and 100% invalid cues. Vision Research, 44, 1193–1207.
5. Eckstein, M. P., Shimozaki, S. S., & Abbey, C. K. (2002). The footprints of visual attention in the Posner cueing paradigm revealed by classification images. Journal of Vision, 2(1), 3:25–45. doi:10.1167/2.1.3
6. Eidels, A., Houpt, J. W., Altieri, N., Pei, L., & Townsend, J. T. (2011). Nice guys finish fast and bad guys finish last: Facilitatory vs. inhibitory interaction in parallel systems. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 55, 176–190.
7. Fifić, M., Little, D. R., & Nosofsky, R. M. (2010). Logical-rule models of classification response times: A synthesis of mental-architecture, random-walk, and decision-bound approaches. Psychological Review, 117, 309–348. doi:10.1037/a0018526
8. Fifić, M., Nosofsky, R. M., & Townsend, J. T. (2008). Information-processing architectures in multidimensional classification: A validation test of the systems factorial technology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 356–375. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.34.2.356
9. Folk, C. L., & Remington, R. (2010). A critical evaluation of the disengagement hypothesis. Acta Psychologica, 135, 103–105. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.04.012
10. 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 and Performance, 18, 1030–1044. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.18.4.1030
11. Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. Oxford, UK: Wiley.
12. Grice, G. R., Canham, L., & Boroughs, J. M. (1984a). Combination rule for redundant information in reaction time tasks with divided attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 35, 451–463.
13. Grice, G. R., Canham, L., & Gwynne, J. W. (1984b). Absence of a redundant-signals effect in a reaction time task with divided attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 36, 565–570. doi:10.3758/BF03207517
14. Hoffman, A. B., & Rehder, B. (2010). The costs of supervised classification: The effect of learning task on conceptual flexibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139, 319–340.
15. Kent, C., Guest, D., Adelman, J. S., & Lamberts, K. (2014). Stochastic accumulation of feature information in perception and memory. Frontiers in Psychology: Cognitive Science, 5, 412. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00412
16. Kruschke, J. K. (1996). Dimensional relevance shifts in category learning. Connection Science, 8, 225–247. doi:10.1080/095400996116893
17. Kruschke, J. K., & Johansen, M. K. (1999). A model of probabilistic category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 1083–1119.
18. Kujala, J. V., & Dzhafarov, E. N. (2008). Testing for selectivity in the dependence of random variables on external factors. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 52, 128–144.
19. LaBerge, D. (1983). Spatial extent of attention to letters and words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 371–379. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.9.3.371
20. Lamberts, K. (1995). Categorization under time pressure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 161–180. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.161
21. Lamberts, K. (1998). The time course of categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 695–711. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.24.3.695
22. Lamberts, K. (2000). Information-accumulation theory of speeded categorization. Psychological Review, 107, 227–260. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.107.2.227
23. Little, D. R., & Lewandowsky, S. (2009). Better learning with more error: Probabilistic feedback increases sensitivity to correlated cues in categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 1041–1061. doi:10.1037/a0015902
24. Little, D. R., & Lewandowsky, S. (2012). Multiple-cue probability learning. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning. New York, NY: Springer.
25. Little, D. R., Nosofsky, R. M., & Denton, S. E. (2011). Response-time tests of logical-rule models of categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1–27.
26. Little, D. R., Nosofsky, R. M., Donkin, C., & Denton, S. E. (2013). Logical rules and the classification of integral-dimension stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 801–820.
27. Luce, D. (1986). Response times: Their role in inferring elementary mental organization. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
28. Miller, J. (1982). Divided attention: Evidence for coactivation with redundant signals. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 247–279. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(82)90010-X
29. Miller, J. (1986). Timecourse of coactivation in bimodal divided attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 40, 331–343. doi:10.3758/BF03203025
30. Miller, J. (1991). Channel interaction and the redundant-targets effect in bimodal divided attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 160–169. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.17.1.160
31. Miniussi, C., Girelli, M., & Marzi, C. A. (1998). Neural site of the redundant target effect: Electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 216–230.
32. Mordkoff, J., & Yantis, S. (1991). An interactive race model of divided attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 520–538. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.17.2.520
33. Mordkoff, J., & Yantis, S. (1993). Dividing attention between color and shape: Evidence of coactivation. Perception & Psychophysics, 53, 357–366.
34. Muller, N. G., Bartelt, O. A., Donner, T. H., Villringer, A., & Brandt, S. A. (2003). A physiological correlate of the “zoom lens” of visual attention. Journal of Neuroscience, 23, 3561–3565.
35. Nosofsky, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification–categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 39–57. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.115.1.39
36. Nosofsky, R. M., & Palmeri, T. J. (1997). An exemplar-based random walk model of speeded classification. Psychological Review, 104, 266–300. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.100.2.266
37. Raab, D. H. (1962). Statistical facilitation of simple reaction times. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences, 24, 574–590.
38. Rehder, B., & Hoffman, A. B. (2005a). Eyetracking and selective attention in category learning. Cognitive Psychology, 51, 1–41.
39. Rehder, B., & Hoffman, A. B. (2005b). Thirty-something categorization results explained: Selective attention, eyetracking, and models of category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 811–829. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.31.5.811
40. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime user’s guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools Inc.
41. Schreij, D., Owens, C., & Theeuwes, J. (2008). Abrupt onsets capture attention independent of top-down control settings. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 208–218. doi:10.3758/PP.70.2.208
42. Sewell, D. K., & Smith, P. L. (2012). Attentional control in visual signal detection: Effects of abrupt-onset and no-onset stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 1043–1068. doi:10.1037/a0026591
43. Theeuwes, J. (1991). Exogenous and endogenous control of attention: The effect of visual onsets and offsets. Perception & Psychophysics, 49, 83–90. doi:10.3758/BF03211619
44. Theeuwes, J. (1994). The effects of location cuing on redundant-target processing. Psychological Research, 57, 15–19.
45. Theeuwes, J. (2004a). No blindness for things that do not change. Psychological Science, 15, 65–70.
46. Theeuwes, J. (2004b). Top-down search strategies cannot override attentional capture. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 65–70. doi:10.3758/BF03206462
47. Theeuwes, J. (2010). Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychologica, 135, 77–99. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.006
48. Theeuwes, J., & Burger, R. (1998). Attentional control during visual search: The effect of irrelevant singletons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1342–1353. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.24.5.1342
49. Townsend, J. T. (1990). Serial vs. parallel processing: Sometimes they look like Tweedledum and Tweedledee but they can (and should) be distinguished. Psychological Science, 1, 46–54. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1990.tb00067.x
50. Townsend, J. T., & Ashby, F. G. (1983). The stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
51. Townsend, J. T., & Eidels, A. (2011). Workload capacity spaces: A unified methodology for response time measures of efficiency as workload is varied. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 659–681. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0106-9
52. Townsend, J. T., & Nozawa, G. (1995). Spatio-temporal properties of elementary perception: An investigation of parallel, serial, and coactive theories. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 39, 321–359. doi:10.1006/jmps.1995.1033
53. Townsend, J. T., & Thomas, R. D. (1994). Stochastic dependencies in parallel and serial models: Effects on systems factorial interactions. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 38, 1–34. doi:10.1006/jmps.1994.1001
54. Townsend, J. T., & Wenger, M. J. (2004). A theory of interactive parallel processing: New capacity measures and predictions for a response time inequality series. Psychological Review, 111, 1003–1035. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.111.4.1003
55. Ulrich, R., & Miller, J. (1997). Tests of race models for reaction time in experiments with asynchronous redundant signals. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 41, 367–381. doi:10.1006/jmps.1997.118
56. Van Zandt, T. (2000). How to fit a response time distribution. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 424–465. doi:10.3758/BF03214357
57. Woodman, G. F., & Luck, S. J. (2007). Do the contents of visual working memory automatically influence attentional selection during visual search? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 363–377. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.33.2.363
58. Yang, C.-T. (2011). Relative saliency in change signals affects perceptual comparison and decision processes in change detection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1708–1728.
59. Yang, C.-T., Chang, T.-Y., & Wu, C.-J. (2013). Relative change probability affects the decision process of detecting multiple feature changes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 1365–1385. doi:10.1037/a0030693
60. Yang, C.-T., Chiu, Y.-C., & Yeh, Y.-Y. (2012). Feature saliency affects delayed matching of an attended feature. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 24, 714–726.
61. Yang, C.-T., Hsu, Y.-F., Huang, H.-Y., & Yeh, Y.-Y. (2011). Relative salience affects the process of detecting changes in orientation and luminance. Acta Psychologica, 138, 377–389.