Literature DB >> 18604956

On the immunity of perceptual implicit memory to manipulations of attention.

Ben R Newell1, Tamara Cavenett, Sally Andrews.   

Abstract

In four experiments, we examined the effect of manipulating study phase attention in a Stroop task on the extent of repetition priming in the lexical decision task (LDT). Experiment 1 replicated the immunity of the LDT to division of attention reported by Szymanski and MacLeod (1996), using a standard Stroop configuration. Response times to previously encountered words were identical regardless of whether the participants were required to read the words or name the color in which they were presented. Experiment 2 demonstrated that implementing the Stroop manipulation across separate visual objects reduced but did not eliminate priming of unattended words, provided the words remained in the attended region of the stimulus display. When this constraint was removed in Experiment 3, priming of unattended words disappeared. Experiment 4 demonstrated statistically equivalent priming for attended and unattended words when the Stroop manipulation remained in the same visual object but attention was directed to a single letter of the word. In all four experiments, the Stroop manipulation had a clear effect on recognition. These results qualify claims that the LDT might be immune to manipulations of study phase attention and suggest that the LDT has a lower threshold level of attention at encoding than do other standard implicit tests of memory.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18604956     DOI: 10.3758/mc.36.4.725

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  28 in total

1.  What kind of attention modulates the Stroop effect?

Authors:  D Besner; J A Stolz
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1999-03

2.  Attention and perceptual implicit memory: effects of selective versus divided attention and number of visual objects.

Authors:  Neil W Mulligan
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2002-07-04

3.  Single letter coloring and spatial cuing eliminates a semantic contribution to the Stroop effect.

Authors:  Laurie A Manwell; Martha Anne Roberts; Derek Besner
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-06

4.  Manipulation of attention at study affects an explicit but not an implicit test of memory.

Authors:  K F Szymanski; C M MacLeod
Journal:  Conscious Cogn       Date:  1996 Mar-Jun

5.  Word-identification priming for ignored and attended words.

Authors:  M Stone; S L Ladd; C J Vaidya; J D Gabrieli
Journal:  Conscious Cogn       Date:  1998-06

6.  Levels of processing and selective attention effects on encoding in memory.

Authors:  S Bentin; M Moscovitch; O Nirhod
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  1998-04

7.  The stroop effect and the myth of automaticity.

Authors:  D Besner; J A Stolz; C Boutilier
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1997-06

8.  Divided attention and indirect memory tests.

Authors:  N W Mulligan; M Hartman
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1996-07

9.  Why do pictures produce priming on the word-fragment completion test? A study of encoding and retrieval factors.

Authors:  M S Weldon; J L Jackson-Barrett
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1993-07

10.  On the status of unconscious memory: Merikle and Reingold (1991) revisited.

Authors:  Christopher J Berry; David R Shanks; Richard N A Henson
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 3.051

View more
  2 in total

1.  Not all identification tasks are born equal: testing the involvement of production processes in perceptual identification and lexical decision.

Authors:  Pietro Spataro; Daniele Saraulli; Neil W Mulligan; Vincenzo Cestari; Marco Costanzi; Clelia Rossi-Arnaud
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-03-11

2.  Comparing Repetition Priming Effects in Words and Arithmetic Equations: Robust Priming Regardless of Color or Response Hand Change.

Authors:  Ailsa Humphries; Zhe Chen; Ewald Neumann
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-01-10
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.