Feature integration without visual attention: Evidence from the correlated flankers task

Mordkoff, J. Toby; Halterman, Rose

doi:10.3758/pbr.15.2.385

Cited by 38 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, it has recently been shown that these frequency-or contingency-based effects can be rooted in color/shape conjunctions, even when participants are instructed to ignore these particular items (Mordkoff & Halterman, 2008). Therefore, the design used by Feintuch and Cohen (2002), with frequency ratios of three-and six-to-one, is potentially biased against the between-object, redundant-targets condition, since this was the only condition under which a rapid shift of attention away from the non-target item -and, presumably, therefore, towards the item containing the target feature(s) -would never occur.…”

Section: Objects Vs Dimensions Revisitedmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(It's important to note that the potential for the sort of bias that was included in their design was not known at the time; it was first discussed in Mordkoff & Halterman, 2008, which appeared several years later.) In brief, when both target features were parts of one item, only one possible combination of color and shape ever appeared in the opposite location.…”

Section: Objects Vs Dimensions Revisitedmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dividing attention between color and shape revisited: redundant targets coactivate only when parts of the same perceptual object

Mordkoff

Danek

2010

Atten Percept Psychophys

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When a single perceptual object provides two different reasons for a particular decision (by containing two qualitatively different targets), detailed analyses of the response-time distributions have shown that the two different reasons are jointly responsible for the final decision. The question is whether this coactivation occurs because the two targets contained by the object were from separate dimensions (e.g., color and shape) or were parts of the same perceptual object. Early work argued in favor of dimensions, implying that the types of information being processed is critical, as opposed to their sources; more recent work has argued in favor of objects. Experiment 1 in the present paper corrected for a potential bias in the design of some recent studies and found additional evidence in favor of objects. Two additional experiments directly manipulated whether redundant targets would be perceived as parts of one or two perceptual objects (while holding all else constant) and produced the strongest evidence to date that coactivation requires that the redundant targets be parts of one object. This reverses the original conclusion and suggests that the sources of information are critical, as opposed to the types. Two specific versions of the objectbased model are discussed.Keywords Divided attention . Perceptual dimensions . Perceptual objects People must often make rapid decisions in situations where there is more than one piece of relevant information. These situations vary from the mundane, such as deciding between paper or plastic at the supermarket checkout (where both convenience and environmental impact are relevant), to the highly stressful, such as deciding whether to swerve to the left or the right when faced with a deer in the road (where both traction and on-coming traffic are relevant). One of the most basic questions that arise in the study of how rapid decisions are made is the manner in which multiple pieces of information are processed. Is all of the evidence in favor of a particular behavior combined in some way, or does one piece of evidence take near-total control, in something akin to a winner-take-all? Or it is not as simple as one or the other -does the manner in which multiple pieces of information are processed depend on the sources or the types of information? These questions can all be addressed by the use of the redundant-targets detection task (for an introduction, see Miller, 1982, or Mordkoff & Yantis, 1991. The answers to these questions tell us much about the functional architecture of the human informationprocessing system, as well as how to design and build better devices to provide information to people who are faced with time-limited decisions.Within the information-processing literature, the idea that multiple pieces of redundant information are somehow combined to activate a single decision is known as the coactivation model (e.g., Miller, 1982;Schwarz, 1989). The alternative idea, under which the strongest or fastest piece of information is wholly responsible fo...

show abstract

Section: Objects Vs Dimensions Revisitedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Objects Vs Dimensions Revisitedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dividing attention between color and shape revisited: redundant targets coactivate only when parts of the same perceptual object

Mordkoff

Danek

2010

Atten Percept Psychophys

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 Within the context of the present report, then, high contingency trials are those in which an item of a category is presented in the color in which most of the other items of that category are presented (e.g., "lawyer" in grey), whereas low contingency trials are those in which the item is presented in another colour (e.g., "doctor" in orange). If colour-word 1 This is also generally true of related learning paradigms, such as the flanker contingency paradigm (Carlson & Flowers, 1996;Miller, 1987;Mordkoff, 1996;Mordkoff & Halterman, 2008), where flanking letters are predictive of a central target letter, and other related paradigms (e.g., Musen & Squire, 1993). 2 Because the high contingency category for each colour was fully counterbalanced across participants (e.g., professions most often in blue for 1/3 of the participants, most often in orange for another 1/3, and most often in grey for the remaining 1/3), all word-colour pairs served equally often as both high and low contingency trials (across participants).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Category learning in the color-word contingency learning paradigm

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the typical colour-word contingency learning paradigm, participants respond to the print colour of words where each word is presented most often in one colour. Learning is indicated by faster and more accurate responses when a word is presented in its usual colour, relative to another colour. To eliminate the possibility that this effect is driven exclusively by the familiarity of item-specific word-colour pairings, we examine whether contingency learning effects can be observed also when colours are related to categories of words rather than to individual words. To this end, the reported experiments used three categories of words (animals, verbs, and professions) that were each predictive of one colour. Importantly, each individual word was presented only once, thus eliminating individual color-word contingencies. Nevertheless, for the first time, a category-based contingency effect was observed, with faster and more accurate responses when a category item was presented in the colour in which most of the other items of that category were presented. This finding helps to constrain episodic learning models and sets the stage for new research on category-based contingency learning.

show abstract

“…In the study of contingency learning, one useful and highly robust tool is the colour word contingency learning paradigm (Schmidt & Besner, 2008;Schmidt, Crump, Cheesman, & Besner, 2007;Schmidt & De Houwer, 2016a; for related paradigms, see Carlson & Flowers, 1996;Levin & Tzelgov, 2016;Miller, 1987;Mordkoff & Halterman, 2008;Schmidt & De Houwer, 2012b, 2012c. In the typical preparation, participants are presented with coloured neutral words (e.g., "plate" in green) and their task is to identify the print colour while ignoring the word.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Best not to bet on the horserace: A comment on Forrin and MacLeod (2017) and a relevant stimulus-response compatibility view of colour-word contingency learning asymmetries

Schmidt

2017

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One powerfully robust method for the study of human contingency learning is the colour-word contingency learning paradigm. In this task, participants respond to the print colour of neutral words, each of which is presented most often in one colour. The contingencies between words and colours are learned, as indicated by faster and more accurate responses when words are presented in their expected colour relative to an unexpected colour. In a recent report, Forrin and MacLeod (in press) asked to what extent this performance (i.e., response time) measure of learning might depend on the relative speed of processing of the word and the colour. With keypress responses, learning effects were comparable when responding to the word and to the colour (contrary to predictions).However, an asymmetry appeared in a second experiment with vocal responses, with a contingency effect only present for colour identification. In a third experiment, the colour was pre-exposed, and contingency effects were again roughly symmetrical. In their report, they suggested that a simple speed-of-processing (or "horserace") model might explain when contingency effects are observed in colour and word identification. In the present report, an alternative view is presented. In particular, it is argued that the results are best explained by appealing to the notion of relevant stimulus-response compatibility, which also resolves discrepancies between horserace model predictions and participant results. The paper presents simulations with the Parallel Episodic Processing model to demonstrate this case.

show abstract

Feature integration without visual attention: Evidence from the correlated flankers task

Cited by 38 publications

References 17 publications

Dividing attention between color and shape revisited: redundant targets coactivate only when parts of the same perceptual object

Dividing attention between color and shape revisited: redundant targets coactivate only when parts of the same perceptual object

Category learning in the color-word contingency learning paradigm

Best not to bet on the horserace: A comment on Forrin and MacLeod (2017) and a relevant stimulus-response compatibility view of colour-word contingency learning asymmetries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About