Task-specific serial position effects in comparisons of multiletter strings

Proctor, Robert W.; Healy, Alice F.

doi:10.3758/bf03210507

Cited by 21 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Proctor and Healy (1987) presented evidence that could have suggested that, in a same-different matching task, an observer's processing strategy changes depending on the task demands. When observers were required to respond "same" only when the items in the two arrays were physically the same and in the same positions (the order-relevant task), position effects were different from those observed when the position of the stimulus items was irrelevant (the orderirrelevant task).…”

Section: Summary and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-terminating versus exhaustive processes in rapid visual and memory search: An evaluative review

Zandt

Townsend

1993

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A major issue in elementary cognition and information processing has been whether rapid search of short-term memory or a visual display can terminate when a predesignated target is found or whether it must proceed until all items are examined. This study summarizes past and recent theoretical results on the ability of self-terminating and exhaustive models to predict differences in slopes between positive (target-present) and negative (target-absent) set-size functions, as well as position effects. The empirical literature is reviewed with regard to the presence of slope differences and position effects. Theoretical investigations demonstrate that self-terminating models can readily predict the results often associated with exhaustive processing, but a very broad class of exhaustive models is incapable of predicting position effects and slope differences typically associated with self-termination. Because position effects and slope differences are found throughout the rapid search literature, we conclude that the exhaustive processing hypothesis is not tenable under common experimental conditions.Since the earliest work in experimental psychology, researchers have been attempting to uncover the architecture of various simple mental processes through the measurement of reaction time (RT; Cattell, 1886Cattell, /1947 Donders, 1868Donders, /1969Wundt, 1894). In RT tasks, an observer is presented with a stimulus, and the time that elapses between its onset and the execution of a response is recorded. The changes in RT under different modes of stimulation or different response requirements are assumed to provide information about the component mental processes and how these components are linked together. Luce (1986), Posner (1978), Townsend and Ashby (1983), and Welford (1980) provide reviews and somewhat differing perspectives on empirical and theoretical research in which RT has been used to study mental processes. This paper focuses on two simple paradigms used extensively to study simple mental processes: rapid visual and memory search. In the search task, an observer is We wish to express our appreciation to one anonymous reviewer, as well as to C. W. Eriksen, W. K. Estes, R. W. Proctor, R. Schweickert, and ]. Theios for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. This research was supported by NSF Grant BNS-831-9377, awarded to]. T.T. Correspondence should be addressed to]. T. Townsend, Department of Psychology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405 (e-mail: jtownsen@ucs.indiana.edu). 563presented with a list of items, called the "search set." The search set is usually composed of letters or numbers, but pictures, words, and tones have also been used. The observer is required to indicate whether a "target" item is present in the search set by executing a positive ("yes") or negative ("no") response. In memory search tasks, the search set is presented to the observer prior to the target item. When the target is presented, the observer must "search" the items held in memory to decide whether or not t...

show abstract

Section: Summary and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-terminating versus exhaustive processes in rapid visual and memory search: An evaluative review

Zandt

Townsend

1993

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the difference in response frequency creates o problem for interpreting the results. By factorially manipulat109task and response frequency, Proctor and Healy (1987) showed that response frequency does not influence the patterns of permutation and replacement effects that are obtained.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The order task shows an exaggerated left-to-right serialposition effect relative to the item task when replacement letters are equally likely in all positions (Proctor & Healy, 1987). It is well known that presentation probabilities systematically affect RTs in visual search and detection (see, e.g., Shaw, 1982;Theios, Smith, Haviland, Traupmann, & Moy, 1973).…”

Section: Experiments 1 Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the overall level of accuracy for same and different responses in the order task becomes progressively less as shorter and shorter RT windows are imposed (Ratcliff, 1981). Moreover, when the proportions of same and different pairs are varied, same and different RTs and errors are traded off in a manner consistent with the alteration of response criteria (Proctor & Healy, 1987).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To account for the results from the order and item tasks, Proctor and Healy (1987) proposed a position-sensitive comparison model in which information toward same or different consists of the pooled output from comparisons of the component letters. According to the model, each letter in one string is compared in parallel with each letter in the other string, with the weightings of the compo-POSITIONAL BIAS AND SPACING 63 nent comparisons being a decreasing function of positional displacement.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Same—differentjudgments of multiletter strings: Insensitivity to positional bias and spacing

Proctor

Healy

Zandt

1991

Perception & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several recent studies of multiletter matching have included pairs of strings that have the same letters in different positions (rearranged pairs). The task can be defined such that these rearranged pairs are correctly classified as different (i.e., subjects respond "same" only if the strings have the same letters in the same positions-the order task) or as same (i.e., subjects respond "same" if the strings have the same letters regardless of their positions-the item task). The order task produces left-to-right serial-position effects, whereas the item task produces U-shaped serialposition effects. Because these differences suggest that subjects may be able to exert strategic control over the comparison process, two sets of experiments were designed to test whether or not subjects can change the relative weightings devoted to the respective serial positions. In Experiments 1 and 2, the probability that a mismatch occurred in the different positions was manipulated. In Experiments 3 and 4, the physical spacing between letters, as well as whether or not the spaces were filled with neutral noise characters, was varied. None of the manipulations had much influence on the serial-position effects. Thus, the distinct serial-position effects for the order and item tasks apparently are mandatory and not due to any voluntary comparison strategy.Numerous studies have investigated same-different matching for pairs of multiletter strings. In many of the models proposed to account for a variety of findings from these studies, it has been presumed that accumulation of pooled perceptual information feeds into a response process (Krueger, 1978; Ratcliff, 1981;Vickers, 1979). The response process includes criteria that determine the amount of similarity or difference to which the information must build before one of the two responses is selected. Consistent with such accumulation models, subjects can trade speed for accuracy when a deadline is imposed (Krueger & Chignell, 1985), suggesting a drop in the criterial amount of information required to select a response. Moreover, subjects can adjust the relative accuracies and latencies for the same and different responses

show abstract