29.01.2013 Views

Abstracts 2005 - The Psychonomic Society

Abstracts 2005 - The Psychonomic Society

Abstracts 2005 - The Psychonomic Society

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Saturday Noon Posters 4079–4085<br />

incompatible targets. Given these ubiquitous flanker effects, many<br />

have concluded that unattended visual objects are routinely identified<br />

without attention. Lachter, Forster, and Ruthruff (2004), however, recently<br />

demonstrated that the effects of flanking words vanish when<br />

care is taken to prevent those words from capturing attention. Here,<br />

we examine whether the same holds true with much simpler stimuli—<br />

individual letters. With flanker and target letters in different cases<br />

(e.g., A vs. a), unattended flankers had no effect. With flanker and target<br />

letters in the same case (A vs. A), however, small flanker effects<br />

emerged. Taken together, these findings suggest that features, but not<br />

letters, are identified without attention.<br />

• COGNITIVE CONTROL •<br />

(4079)<br />

Conflict-Related Processing Adjustment at Short RSIs: <strong>The</strong> ABI<br />

Effect and Posterror Slowing. INES JENTZSCH, University of St.<br />

Andrews, & HARTMUT LEUTHOLD, University of Glasgow—In short-<br />

RSI situations, participants are usually slower in trial n when the response<br />

alternates in trial n�1. We recently suggested that this alternationbased<br />

interference (ABI) effect results from adjustments following response<br />

conflict in the preceding trial (Jentzsch & Leuthold, <strong>2005</strong>).<br />

Here, we investigate whether the ABI effect is modulated by an error<br />

response on trial n�1. We hypothesized that response alternations, as<br />

well as an error on trial n�1, should produce processing conflicts<br />

leading to changes in subsequent performance. Twelve participants<br />

were tested, using the information reduction paradigm, with four<br />

stimuli assigned to two responses. To control for influences of error<br />

corrections, single- or double-keypress responses with either the same<br />

hand or different hands were required. <strong>The</strong> ABI effect was reversed<br />

in posterror trials, independently of response condition. We therefore<br />

suggest that sequence-related response conflicts at short RSIs can<br />

modify processes underlying top-down adjustments after errors.<br />

(4080)<br />

<strong>The</strong> Impact of Combined Temporal and Nontemporal Constraints<br />

on the Control of a Dynamic Task. MARIE-EVE JOBIDON &<br />

ROBERT ROUSSEAU, Université Laval, & RICHARD BRETON,<br />

Defence R&D Canada—This study aims to understand the role of<br />

temporal and nontemporal contextual constraints in the control of a<br />

dynamic task. From the contextual control model (Hollnagel, 1993),<br />

two temporal parameters are identified: TA and TR, the time available<br />

and required to achieve control. <strong>The</strong> objective is to evaluate how variations<br />

in the objective value of TA and TR (through time pressure and<br />

workload, respectively) influence control and the subjective estimation<br />

of both temporal parameters. A dynamic situation including two subtasks,<br />

the pursuit of a target and the avoidance of hostile contacts, was used.<br />

Results suggest that performance and time estimation be affected by<br />

the combination of the two variables: In some cases, the impact of<br />

time pressure and workload are additive; in others, it is not. Findings<br />

demonstrate that changes in the value of TA and TR can impair the<br />

operator’s ability to control the system and can affect time estimation.<br />

(4081)<br />

Repetition Priming and Cognitive Control in Stroop-Like Tasks.<br />

DIEGO FERNANDEZ-DUQUE & MARYBETH KNIGHT, Villanova<br />

University—In Stroop-like tasks, distraction is often reduced by factors<br />

that warn participants about incoming conflict. <strong>The</strong>re is a heated<br />

debate regarding whether this modulation is due to repetition priming<br />

or enhanced cognitive control. We explored this question in a paradigm<br />

in which color and number Stroop tasks alternated every trial.<br />

Dynamic trial-to-trial changes were fully explained by repetition<br />

priming. In contrast, conflict resolution was truly enhanced in blocks<br />

with disproportionate number of incongruent trials. This modulation<br />

was task specific. Finally, we assessed voluntary modulation of cognitive<br />

control: A cue predicted the congruency of the color Stroop, allowing<br />

subjects to establish the correct mindset. Getting prepared for<br />

an incongruent color enhanced conflict resolution in the number task,<br />

117<br />

an example of across-task modulation. <strong>The</strong>se experiments reveal the<br />

multifaceted aspects of conflict resolution: Trial-to-trial changes are<br />

due to repetition priming, tonic modulations brought about by task demands<br />

are task specific, and voluntary modulations are task general.<br />

(4082)<br />

Sequential Modulations in the Simon Effect Depend on Task Structure.<br />

CAGLAR AKCAY & ELIOT HAZELTINE, University of Iowa<br />

(sponsored by Eliot Hazeltine)—Spatially defined responses to a nonspatial<br />

attribute of a stimulus are faster when the location of the stimulus<br />

is congruent with the response. This effect, called the Simon effect,<br />

depends on contingencies in trial sequence, since after incongruent<br />

trials the effect of congruency diminishes. One account of these sequential<br />

effects presumes a conflict-monitoring mechanism that adjusts<br />

the use of information on the basis of response conflict on the<br />

previous trial. An alternative hypothesis of feature integration draws<br />

upon the effects of repetition and alternation of stimulus–response<br />

episodes. Using a four-choice Simon-type task, we sought to distinguish<br />

between these two accounts. <strong>The</strong> results showed that sequential<br />

effects depend on the task structure, operating presumably within a<br />

task representation. <strong>The</strong> carryover of sequential effects was examined<br />

in further experiments using common stimulus attributes for pairs of<br />

responses or common responses for pairs of stimuli. <strong>The</strong> results are<br />

discussed in terms of the two competing accounts.<br />

(4083)<br />

Stimulus and Response Conflict Induced Cognitive Control in the<br />

Flanker Task. FREDERICK VERBRUGGEN, WIM NOTEBAERT,<br />

BAPTIST LIEFOOGHE, ANDRÉ VANDIERENDONCK, & TOM<br />

VERGUTS, Ghent University—Recently, several studies investigated<br />

the top-down adjustments made after incongruent trials during conflict<br />

tasks. <strong>The</strong> present study investigated conflict monitoring with<br />

different types of conflict. In a modified version of the flanker task, a<br />

distinction was made between stimulus–stimulus conflict and stimulus–<br />

response conflict. Six colors were mapped onto three responses in<br />

order to exclude all sequences where a relevant or irrelevant feature<br />

was repeated from trial n�1 to trial n. Analyses as a function of the<br />

congruency of the previous trial demonstrated that conflict adaptation<br />

was present. <strong>The</strong> stimulus congruency effect was reduced both after<br />

a stimulus-incongruent trial and after a response-incongruent trial.<br />

<strong>The</strong> mere response congruency effect did not vary as a function of previous<br />

congruency. <strong>The</strong>se findings are discussed in relation to the distinction<br />

between conflict detection and conflict regulation.<br />

(4084)<br />

Influence of Complex Distractors in the Remote Distractor Paradigm.<br />

VALERIE BROWN, JOHN M. FINDLAY, & SIMON P. LIVERSEDGE,<br />

University of Durham (sponsored by Simon P. Liversedge)—Three<br />

experiments examined the influence of complex distractors in the remote<br />

distractor effect (RDE) paradigm (Walker, Deubel, Schneider, &<br />

Findlay, 1997). Experiment 1 examined whether different types of distractors<br />

modulated the RDE in any systematic way. Linguistic distractors<br />

produced prolonged SOLs for central versus peripheral presentation.<br />

Nonlinguistic distractors produced equivalent SOLs for central<br />

and peripheral presentation. This unexpected finding was investigated<br />

in Experiment 2, which showed that repeated presentation of a distractor<br />

results in reduced saccade latencies for centrally presented distractors,<br />

regardless of distractor status (i.e., linguistic or nonlinguistic).<br />

In Experiment 3, this was reproduced for same-category repeated and<br />

changing distractors, and a difference in SOLs was obtained between<br />

two types of linguistic distractors at a parafoveal presentation location.<br />

Latencies for single target trials were influenced by the type of distractor<br />

they were presented with. Although SOLs are modulated by distractor<br />

complexity, RDE magnitudes are not.<br />

(4085)<br />

Age-Related Increase in Intraindividual Variability Points to Decline<br />

in Attentional Control. TARA MCAULEY & DESIREE A. WHITE,

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!