Literature DB >> 9861719

What is learned during automatization? II. Obligatory encoding of spatial location.

G D Logan1.   

Abstract

Six experiments addressed the encoding of location information during automatization, to test a critical prediction of the instance theory of automaticity (G. D. Logan, 1988). Subjects searched 1- or 2-word displays for members of a target category. Specific targets appeared in the same locations consistently throughout training, and then location changed at transfer. Sensitivity to changes in location were assessed with implicit and explicit memory tests. In both tests, sensitivity depended on the number of locations the words could occupy (2 vs. 16). Sensitivity varied with the number of words presented (1 vs. 2) in the implicit test, but not in the explicit test. The results suggest that subjects encoded the locations of the words during automatization, which confirms the predictions of the instance theory.

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9861719     DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.24.6.1720

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


  11 in total

1.  Activation of context-specific attentional control sets by exogenous allocation of visual attention to the context?

Authors:  Caroline Gottschalk; Rico Fischer
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-02-05

2.  The context-specific proportion congruent Stroop effect: location as a contextual cue.

Authors:  Matthew J C Crump; Zhiyu Gong; Bruce Milliken
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2006-04

3.  Memory for words location in writing.

Authors:  Nathalie Le Bigot; Jean-Michel Passerault; Thierry Olive
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2008-02-09

4.  The strategic control of prospective memory monitoring in response to complex and probabilistic contextual cues.

Authors:  Julie M Bugg; B Hunter Ball
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2017-07

5.  Rapid acquisition but slow extinction of an attentional bias in space.

Authors:  Yuhong V Jiang; Khena M Swallow; Gail M Rosenbaum; Chelsey Herzig
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2012-03-19       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Attentional influences on memory formation: A tale of a not-so-simple story.

Authors:  J Ortiz-Tudela; B Milliken; L Jiménez; J Lupiáñez
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2018-05

7.  Aging and the strategic use of context to control prospective memory monitoring.

Authors:  B Hunter Ball; Julie M Bugg
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2018-05

8.  Decomposing experience-driven attention: Opposite attentional effects of previously predictive cues.

Authors:  Zhicheng Lin; Zhong-Lin Lu; Sheng He
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 2.199

9.  Is Your Color My Color? Dividing the Labor of the Stroop Task Between Co-actors.

Authors:  Motonori Yamaguchi; Emma L Clarke; Danny L Egan
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-08-06

10.  In Support of a Distinction between Voluntary and Stimulus-Driven Control: A Review of the Literature on Proportion Congruent Effects.

Authors:  Julie M Bugg; Matthew J C Crump
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-09-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.