Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance
-
In 3 experiments the authors investigate how errors in perception produce errors in drawings. In Experiment 1, when Shepard stimuli were shown as a pair of tables, participants made severe errors in trying to adjust 1 part of the stimulus to match the other. When the table legs were removed, revealing a pair of parallelograms with minimal perspective cues, the illusion was weaker. ⋯ The results of Experiment 2 support the prediction and establish a direct link between degree of perceptual distortion of the table stimuli and the severity of error in drawing. When drawing only the right-hand part of the figure, participants also erred to a greater degree in drawing the table than the parallelogram (Experiment 3). Collectively, the results suggest that perceptual distortion is linked with errors in drawing the table stimuli.
-
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform · Jun 2004
The costs of changing the representation of action: response repetition and response-response compatibility in dual tasks.
In 5 experiments, the authors investigated the costs associated with repeating the same or a similar response in a dual-task setting. Using a psychological refractory period paradigm, they obtained response-repetition costs when the cognitive representation of a specific response (i.e., the category-response mapping) changed (Experiment 1) but benefits when it did not change (Experiment 2). ⋯ Response-response compatibility costs occurred when the cognitive representations of the compatible responses were different (Experiments 3A & 3B), but compatibility benefits occurred when they were the same (Experiment 4). The authors interpret the costs of repeating an identical or compatible response in terms of a general mechanism of action selection that involves coding the task-specific meaning of a response.
-
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform · Oct 2001
Time course of the blindness to response-compatible stimuli.
This article examines the time course of a deficit in identifying a stimulus sharing a compatible feature with a response that is executed in parallel ("blindness to response-compatible stimuli," J. Müsseler & B. Hommel, 1997a). ⋯ A blindness effect was observed when the stimulus was presented between response cue offset and response execution. In contrast, the identification of a stimulus presented before the response cue or after response execution was not affected by stimulus-response compatibility--a finding that rules out a retention-based explanation. These results support an explanation that states that the perceptual processing of a stimulus feature is impaired as long as the shared perception-action feature code is integrated into the representation of a to-be-executed response.
-
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform · Feb 2001
Influence of prime-probe stimulus onset asynchrony and prime precuing manipulations on semantic priming effects with words in a lexical-decision task.
The present research examines semantic priming from attended and unattended parafoveal words. Participants made a lexical decision in response to a single central target. ⋯ The results showed (a) reliable semantic priming from both attended and ignored prime words and (b) that the ignored priming effects were either negative or positive, depending on both the prime-probe SOA and cue informativeness. The present findings are discussed in relation to inhibitory versus episodic retrieval models of negative priming.
-
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform · Oct 1998
Attentional control during visual search: the effect of irrelevant singletons.
Four experiments investigated whether a highly salient color singleton can be ignored during serial search. Observers searched for a target letter among nontarget letters and were instructed to ignore an irrelevant, highly salient color singleton that was either compatible or incompatible with the response to the target letter. ⋯ The ability to selectively filter singleton distractors during serial search depends on the presence of an attentional set for a specific feature value of both target and distractor. In the absence of a consistently predictable feature value of both target and distractor, top-down control is not possible.