Abstracts 2005 - The Psychonomic Society

Friday Noon Posters 2064–2070
object-based attention comes from the spatial-cuing paradigm popularized
by Egly et al. (1994). An invalidly cued location enjoying attentional
benefits may be due to the fact that the spread of attention
is faster and/or more efficient within an object than across different
objects. However, manipulation of cue validity in the cuing paradigm
typically causes the invalidly cued location to have a higher processing
priority, which also could account for the same-object benefit
(Shomstein & Yantis, 2002, 2004). Here, in three experiments, we examine
whether or not priority setting can modulate allocation of
object-based attention. The results indicate that when the cued objects
enjoyed a relatively high priority, the typical same-object effect was
obtained. As the processing priority for the cued object declined, however,
the same-object benefit was eliminated. A two-mechanism hypothesis
is proposed to provide an integrated account for object-based
attention demonstrated by the cuing paradigm.
(2064)
Attention to Multicolor Patterns: A Binary Mapping Principle.
LIQIANG HUANG & HAROLD PASHLER, University of California,
San Diego (sponsored by Harold Pashler)—We suggest that people
can directly apprehend the spatial arrangement of different colors
in a pattern only through the iterative creation of separate “binary
maps,” each encoding the spatial arrangement of just a single color
(e.g., the red elements or the green elements). To test this, observers
judged whether two simultaneously presented four-color figures
matched or not. Two conditions were compared: ABBA (e.g., change
a red square to blue and change a blue square to red) or ABCD (e.g.,
change a red square to blue and change a green square to yellow). Binary
mapping predicts that ABCD mismatches should be substantially
easier to find, because here a mismatch will be discovered in the first
binary map checked. This prediction was confirmed. The potential
relevance of binary mapping to various theoretical issues in visual attention
and to multidimensional data visualization will be pointed out.
(2065)
Limits of Redundancy Gain and Coactivation in Three-Dimensional
Visual Stimuli. SONJA ENGMANN & DENIS COUSINEAU, Université
de Montréal (sponsored by Denis Cousineau)—Response times of
participants in a visual object recognition task decrease significantly
if targets can be distinguished by several redundant attributes. Statistical
facilitation models predict such a gain (Townsend & Ashby,
1983). However, coactivation models give a better approximation of
the strength of gain (Miller, 1982). Triple redundancy effects have
been found with stimuli from different modalities (tactile, visual, and
auditory; Diederich, 1992) but are difficult to obtain with purely visual
stimuli. The present research examines the influence of varying
visual attributes, using three-dimensional redundant stimuli. We study
the increase in gain with each added attribute and its dependence on
attribute type. We also investigate whether masking influences coactivation
as the cause of gain. Results show that redundancy gain of a
third attribute depends on the degree of overlap of processing pathways.
The perceived gain could be attributed to coactivation. However, the
masking effects contradict all present theories of coactivation.
• DIVIDED ATTENTION AND AUTOMATIC PROCESSING •
(2066)
Combined Action Effects Determine the Simon Effect Obtained
With Wheel Rotation Responses. DONG-YUAN DEBBIE WANG,
University of North Florida, & ROBERT W. PROCTOR & DAVID F.
PICK, Purdue University—Four experiments investigated how irrelevant
action effects influence response selection in an auditory Simon
task, for which stimulus location was irrelevant and responses were
wheel rotations. In addition to the action effects of wheel and hand
movement produced inherently by turning the wheel, wheel movement
also caused left or right movement of a visual cursor in several conditions.
Experiments 1–3 showed that the size of the Simon effect decreased
when opposing action effects coexisted and suggested that the
79
opposite action effects were combined before the initiation of a motor
program. Experiment 4 demonstrated that the size of the Simon effect
could be changed gradually by manipulating the period in the task sequence
during which the wheel controlled the cursor. A combined action
effect model is proposed to account for the size change of the
Simon effect when action effects are in opposition.
(2067)
Stimulus–Response Associations in Dual-Task Stroop. MARK G.
VAN SELST, JENNIFER CHENG, & TAO-CHUNG (TIM) WANG,
San Jose State University—In a continuing series of experiments, the
role of stimulus–response compatibility in dual-task stroop interference
is examined. Prior work indicates Stroop interference to be additive
across SOA in the PRP paradigm, despite presenting half of the
stimuli with each letter individually rotated 180º in the picture plane.
This finding holds for verbal, as well as manual, responses and when
the response is “red” versus “not red,” rather than “red” versus “green.”
In contrast to some expectations, the patterns of data do not support
the notion that the “red” versus the “not-red” condition produces qualitatively
different processing than the “red” versus “green” condition,
even in the manual response condition, to yield the weakest S–R
connection.
(2068)
New Analysis of Stroop Matching Task Calls for Theory Reevaluation.
AVISHAI HENIK & LIAT GOLDFARB, Ben-Gurion University
of the Negev—In Stroop matching tasks, participants match between an
object color and the meaning of a colored color word. Previously, it was
concluded that interference between two incongruent representations
of the same attribute (ink color) appears prior to the response stage.
This conclusion is based on questionable data analysis. We suggest
analyzing the data by separating “same” and “different” responses and
then analyzing three congruency conditions within the “different” responses:
(1) congruent word color–word meaning, (2) congruent word
color–object color, and (3) incongruent word color, word meaning,
and another object color. This analysis reveals that responding is slowest
in the first condition. This pattern of results does not fit with previous
conclusions regarding this task but supports the contributions
of task conflict and response competition. This analysis has implications
for matching tasks other than the Stroop matching task.
(2069)
Lateralized Readiness Potential Evidence for Parallel Response
Selection in Dual Tasks. SCOTT WATTER, JUDITH M. SHEDDEN,
& JENNIFER J. HEISZ, McMaster University—Recent work (e.g.,
Hommel, 1998; Watter & Logan, 2005) shows that in a typical psychological
refractory period (PRP) dual-task paradigm, the manual response
to a later Task 2 can influence Task 1 responding, suggesting
that response information for Task 2 is available prior to completion
of Task 1 response selection, violating Pashler’s (1994) response selection
bottleneck framework. We employed ERP methods to assess
the timing and cross-task influences of response selection processes
in a PRP paradigm. Building on critical earlier lateral readiness potential
(LRP) information processing work by Osman and Moore
(1993) and Gratton et al. (1988), we sought to better quantify critical
Task 2 to Task 1 response compatibility effects—previously observed in
RT measures and taken as evidence for parallel operation of response
selection processes—by investigating LRP latencies and amplitudes
for these priming effects. Priming of Task 1 response selection from
Task 2 response information was observed, along with LRP morphologies
reflecting Task 2 to Task 1 influence of response selection.
(2070)
The Role of Perceptual Emergent Features in Dual-Task Performance.
KIM-PHUONG L. VU, California State University, Long
Beach, & ROBERT W. PROCTOR, Purdue University—For dual-task
performance with all combinations of compatible and incompatible
stimulus–response mappings, performance is better when the map-