No abstract

No abstract

Endogenous temporal-orienting effects were studied using a cuing paradigm in which the cue indicated the time interval during which the target was most likely to appear. Temporal-orienting effects were defined by lower reaction times (RTs) when there was a match between the temporal expectancy for a target (early or late) and the time interval during which the target actually appeared than when they mismatched. Temporal-orienting effects were found for both early and late expectancies with a detection task in Experiment 1. However, catch trials were decisive in whether temporal-orienting effects were observed in the early-expectancycondition. No temporal-orienting effects were found in the discrimination task. In Experiments 2A and 2B, temporal-orienting effects were observed in the discrimination task; however, they were larger when temporal expectancy was manipulated between blocks, rather than within blocks.

No abstract

A review of traditional research on preparation and foreperiod has identified strategic (endogenous) and automatic (exogenous) factors probably involved in endogenous temporal-orienting experiments, such as the type of task, the way by which temporal expectancy is manipulated, the probability of target occurrence and automatic sequential effects, yet their combined impact had not been investigated. These factors were manipulated within the same temporal-orienting procedure, in which a temporal cue indicated that the target could appear after an interval of either 400 or 1,400 ms. We observed faster reaction times for validly versus invalidly cued targets, that is, endogenous temporal-orienting effects. The main results were that the probability of target occurrence (catch-trial proportion) modulated temporal orienting, such that the attentional effects at the short interval were independent of catch trials, whereas at the long interval the effects were only observed when catch trials were present. In contrast, the interval duration of the previous trial (i.e., exogenous sequential effects) did not influence endogenous temporal orienting. A flexible and endogenous mechanism of attentional orienting in time can account for these results. Despite the contribution of other factors, the use of predictive temporal cues was sufficient to yield attentional facilitation based on temporal expectancy.