Literature DB >> 2946804

Recognition memory and attentional selection: serial scanning is not enough.

B A Eriksen, C W Eriksen, J E Hoffman.   

Abstract

In two experiments, using memory sets of up to 10 letters, the response competition paradigm was employed to investigate the extent to which extraneous visual stimuli interfere with or affect the process of memory search. It was assumed that if selective attention could exclude the effect of noise letters from a Sternberg-type memory comparison process, then there would be an increase in intercept for the reaction time-set size functions but no increase in slope. This result was obtained. However, a large difference in response times to both positive and negative set targets was found when the accompanying noise letters indicated a competing response, as opposed to when they indicated the same response as the target. This implies rapid identification of the nature of both target and noise, independent of a serial comparison process. A modification of a dual process model (Juola, Fischler, Wood, & Atkinson, 1971) in which stimuli activate a familiarity value independent of memory search was suggested to account for these results.

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 2946804     DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.12.4.476

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  10 in total

1.  Are spatial and dimensional attention separate? evidence from Posner, Stroop, and Eriksen tasks.

Authors:  Eran Chajut; Asi Schupak; Daniel Algom
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2009-09

2.  Recognition memory for object form and object location: an event-related potential study.

Authors:  A Mecklinger; R M Meinshausen
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1998-09

3.  How much processing do nonattended stimuli receive? Apparently very little, but....

Authors:  C W Eriksen; J M Webb; L R Fournier
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1990-05

4.  Response-compatibility effects in focused-attention tasks: a same-hand advantage in response activation.

Authors:  J Miller
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1988-01

5.  Negative priming between response modalities: evidence for the central locus of inhibition in selective attention.

Authors:  S P Tipper; G M MacQueen; J C Brehaut
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1988-01

6.  Attentional distribution in visual space.

Authors:  C W Eriksen; K Pan; J Botella
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  1993

Review 7.  Perceptual load as a major determinant of the locus of selection in visual attention.

Authors:  N Lavie; Y Tsal
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1994-08

8.  The effects of age and divided attention on spontaneous recognition.

Authors:  Benjamin A Anderson; Larry L Jacoby; Ruthann C Thomas; David A Balota
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-05

9.  The role of object categories in hybrid visual and memory search.

Authors:  Corbin A Cunningham; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2014-03-24

10.  When irrelevant information helps: Extending the Eriksen-flanker task into a multisensory world.

Authors:  Simon Merz; Christian Frings; Charles Spence
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 2.199

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.