Literature DB >> 21479725

Attentional control settings modulate susceptibility to the induced Roelofs effect.

Benjamin D Lester1, Paul Dassonville.   

Abstract

When a visible frame is offset laterally from an observer's objective midline, the subjective midline is pulled toward the frame's center, causing the frame and any enclosed targets to be misperceived as being shifted somewhat in the opposite direction. This illusion, the Roelofs effect, is driven by environmental (bottom-up) visual cues, but whether it can be modulated by top-down (e.g., task-relevant) information is unknown. Here, we used an attentional manipulation (i.e., the color-contingency effect) to test whether attentional filtering can modulate the magnitude of the illusion. When observers were required to report the location of a colored target, presented within an array of differently colored distractors, there was a greater effect of the illusion when the Roelofs-inducing frame was the same color as the target. These results indicate that feature-based attentional processes can modulate the impact of contextual information on an observer's perception of space.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21479725      PMCID: PMC3546118          DOI: 10.3758/s13414-011-0123-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.199


  24 in total

1.  Going round in circles: shape effects in the Ebbinghaus illusion.

Authors:  David Rose; Paola Bressan
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  2002

2.  The induced Roelofs effect: two visual systems or the shift of a single reference frame?

Authors:  Paul Dassonville; Bruce Bridgeman; Jagdeep Kaur Bala; Paul Thiem; Anthony Sampanes
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Made you blink! Contingent attentional capture produces a spatial blink.

Authors:  Charles L Folk; Andrew B Leber; Howard E Egeth
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2002-07

4.  Are the original Roelofs effect and the induced Roelofs effect caused by the same shift in straight ahead?

Authors:  Denise D J de Grave; Eli Brenner; Jeroen B J Smeets
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Are the original Roelofs effect and the induced Roelofs effect confounded by the same expansion of remembered space?

Authors:  Paul Dassonville; Jagdeep Kaur Bala
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  Grouping with and without attention.

Authors:  Wai Yen Chan; Fook K Chua
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2003-12

7.  Decrement of the Müller-Lyer and Poggendorff illusions: the effects of inspection and practice.

Authors:  John Predebon
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2005-07-30

8.  Grouping does not require attention.

Authors:  Dominique Lamy; Hannah Segal; Lital Ruderman
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2006-01

9.  A specific autistic trait that modulates visuospatial illusion susceptibility.

Authors:  Elizabeth Walter; Paul Dassonville; Tiana M Bochsler
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2008-08-08

10.  Orientation illusions vary in size and direction as a function of task-dependent attention.

Authors:  Roberta Daini; Peter Wenderoth
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2008-10
View more
  2 in total

1.  An allocentric exception confirms an egocentric rule: a comment on Taghizadeh and Gail (2014).

Authors:  Paul Dassonville; Benjamin D Lester; Scott A Reed
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 3.169

2.  Spatial task context makes short-latency reaches prone to induced Roelofs illusion.

Authors:  Bahareh Taghizadeh; Alexander Gail
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-08-29       Impact factor: 3.169

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.