Search

Response repetitions aid performance when a task repeats but impair performance when a task switches. Although this interaction is robust, theoretical accounts remain controversial. Here, we used an un-cued, predictable task-switching paradigm with univalent targets to explore whether a simple bias to switch the response when the task switches can explain the interaction. In Experiment 1A (n = 40), we replicated the basic interaction in a two-choice task. In Experiment 1B (n = 60), we observed the same interaction in a three-choice task, wherein a bias to switch the response when the task switches cannot prime a specific alternative response because both remaining response alternatives are equally likely. Exploratory comparisons revealed a larger interaction between task repetition and response repetition in the three-choice task than in the two-choice task for mean response time (RT) and the opposite pattern for mean error rate (ER). Critically, in the three-choice task, response-repetition costs in task switches were significant in both RT and ER. Since a bias to switch the response cannot prime a specific response alternative in a three-choice task, we conclude that such a bias cannot account for response-repetition costs in task-switch trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The oddball duration illusion describes how a rare or nonrepeated stimulus is perceived as lasting longer than a common or repeated stimulus. It has been argued that the oddball duration illusion could emerge because of an earlier perceived onset of an oddball stimulus. However, most methods used to assess the perceived duration of an oddball stimulus are ill suited to detect onset effects. Therefore, in the current article, I tested the perceived onset of oddball and standard stimuli using a simultaneity judgment task. In Experiments 1 and 2, repetition and rarity of the target stimulus were varied, and participants were required to judge whether the target stimulus and another stimulus were concurrent. In Experiment 3, I tested whether a brief initial stimulus could act as a conditioning stimulus in the oddball duration illusion. This was to ensure an oddball duration illusion could have occurred given the short duration of stimuli in the first two experiments. In both the first two experiments, I found moderate support for no onset-based difference between oddball and nonoddball stimuli. In Experiment 3, I found that a short conditioning stimulus could still lead to the oddball duration illusion occurring, removing this possible explanation for the null result. Experiment 4 showed that an oddball duration illusion could emerge given the rarity of the stimulus and a concurrent sound. In sum, the current article found evidence against an onset-based explanation of the oddball duration illusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When we respond to a stimulus, our ability to quickly execute this response depends on how combinations of stimulus and response features match to previous combinations of stimulus and response features. Some kind of memory representations must be underlying these visuomotor repetition effects. In this paper, we tested the hypothesis that visual working memory stores the stimulus information that gives rise to these effects. Participants discriminated the colors of successive stimuli while holding either three locations or colors in visual working memory. If visual working memory maintains the information about a previous event that leads to visuomotor repetition effects, then occupying working memory with colors or locations should selectively disrupt color–response and location–response repetition effects. The results of two experiments showed that neither color nor spatial memory load eliminated visuomotor repetition effects. Since working memory load did not disrupt repetition effects, it is unlikely that visual working memory resources are used to store the information that underlies visuomotor repetitions effects. Instead, these results are consistent with the view that visuomotor repetition effects stem from automatic long-term memory retrieval, but can also be accommodated by supposing separate buffers for visual working memory and response selection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Once presumed to be intimately related, feature integration and the consequences of attentional orienting are now often studied separately. Yet the paradigms used to study each can be highly similar; participants respond to a stimulus, which is then followed by a second stimulus, matching or mismatching the first on some feature(s). Given the similarities between the methods, it seems likely that these fields each could gain insights regarding their own work by looking at the other. Here we note a peculiarity of feature integration research: It relies on paradigms that require or encourage participants to identify the nonspatial features of a stimulus in order to make the correct response. This leaves open the question of whether feature integration effects can be found in tasks that do not require stimulus identity (e.g., color or shape) processing. To answer this question, we reviewed attentional orienting studies that manipulated whether stimulus identity repeated but that required only detection or localization responses, irrespective of stimulus identity. With one exception, feature integration effects were absent from those experiments. Furthermore, we attempted to replicate the exception and found no feature integration effects. Our review shows that detection and localization paradigms are particularly useful for studying the consequences of attentional orienting in the absence of integration effects, and that these same tasks provide a baseline to understand the sources of feature integration effects with only slightly variations in the basic task. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When there is a relatively long interval between two successive stimuli that must be detected or localized, there are robust processing costs when the stimuli appear at the same location. However, when two successive visual stimuli that must be identified appear at the same location, there are robust same location costs only when the two stimuli differ in their responses; otherwise same location benefits are observed. Two separate frameworks that inhibited attentional orienting and episodic integration, respectively, have been proposed to account for these patterns. Recent findings hint at a possible reconciliation between these frameworks-requiring a response to an event in between two successive visual stimuli may unmask same stimulus and same location costs that are otherwise obscured by episodic integration benefits in identification tasks. We tested this hybrid account by integrating an intervening response event with an identification task that would otherwise generate the boundary between same location benefits and costs. Our results showed that the intervening event did not alter the boundary between location repetition benefits and costs nor did it reliably or unambiguously reverse the common stimulus-response repetition benefit. The findings delimit the usefulness of an intervening event for disrupting episodic integration, suggesting that effects from intervening response events are tenuous. The divide between attention and feature integration accounts is delineated in the context of methodological and empirical considerations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In an exogenous cueing task repeating a non-spatial feature can benefit performance if the feature is task-relevant to a discrimination response. Previous studies reporting this effect have used complex displays. In the current study, we look at the generalizability of this effect, by extending it to a simple exogenous cueing paradigm in which the cue and target displays each consist of single-object onsets. We also investigate the influence of task-relevant and irrelevant features independently within the same experiment. Consistent with previous studies, we find non-spatial feature repetition benefits in all three experiments. Importantly, and unlike previous studies, we find that the most salient, rather than the task-relevant, feature drives the non-spatial feature repetition benefit. Furthermore, in addition to the previously observed non-spatial feature repetition benefits, we also found a spatially specific feature repetition benefit. We argue that these new findings are consistent with habituation accounts of attentional cueing effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigated whether binding among perception and action feature codes is a preliminary step toward creating a more durable memory trace of an action event. If so, increasing the frequency of a particular event (e.g., a stimulus requiring a movement with the left or right hand in an up or down direction) should increase the strength and speed of feature binding for this event. The results from two experiments, using a partial-repetition paradigm, confirmed that feature binding increased in strength and/or occurred earlier for a high-frequency (e.g., left hand moving up) than for a low-frequency (e.g., right hand moving down) event. Moreover, increasing the frequency of the first-specified feature in the action sequence alone (e.g., 'left' hand) increased the strength and/or speed of action feature binding (e.g., between the 'left' hand and movement in an 'up' or 'down' direction). The latter finding suggests an update to the theory of event coding, as not all features in the action sequence equally determine binding strength. We conclude that action planning involves serial binding of features in the order of action feature execution (i.e., associations among features are not bidirectional but are directional), which can lead to a more durable memory trace. This is consistent with physiological evidence suggesting that serial order is preserved in an action plan executed from memory and that the first feature in the action sequence may be critical in preserving this serial order. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We have previously reported evidence that repetitions of letters, colors, sizes, and common motion paths are more rapidly detected when they are presented unilaterally (i.e., both in the same visual field) versus bilaterally (one element in each visual field; Butcher and Cavanagh (Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 70:714-724, ). Here, we report evidence that this unilateral field advantage (UFA) for repetition detection does not depend on prior experience with the elements that comprise the repetition. In Experiment 1, native English, Persian, and Japanese speakers were tested on a repetition detection task involving characters from Western, Arabic, and Japanese character sets. The character sets were tested in blocks, in each of which subjects were presented with four characters for 16 ms and asked to report whether any two of the characters were identical. The subjects were faster detecting repetitions that were presented unilaterally rather than bilaterally, and there was no interaction with stimulus familiarity. A second experiment replicated this finding with native English speakers only, using a longer stimulus duration (150 ms). We had previously proposed that the UFA arises because the low-level processes that group physically identical items operate more efficiently within than across hemifields. Our data now indicate that this grouping process is insensitive to item familiarity, supporting the claim that the process is low-level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Search performance is sequence-dependent. A specific finding observed in compound-search tasks consists of an interaction between cross-trial sequences (repetition vs. change) of the target-defining (primary) and response-defining (secondary) features: The effect of a target change is greater when the response stays the same than when the response changes. The present study tested whether this interaction arises from processes involved in target search or from later processes in compound tasks. Uncertainty about the upcoming target location-that is, the search component of compound tasks-was removed in different experiments, either by the use of exogenous spatial precues or by presenting only one, central item. Despite having removed the search component, we observed a robust interaction between target (primary) and response (secondary) feature sequences. These results suggest that this interaction originates from a processing stage concerned with discriminating the response feature of a single (selected) item, rather than from a search-related stage. Furthermore, the results support our multiple-weighting-systems hypothesis, according to which sequence effects in visual search tasks do not stem from a single, unitary mechanism; rather, multiple stages of processing on any given trial can lead to separate memory traces, which in turn have effects on different stages of processing on the subsequent trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Numerous studies have shown that repetition of search-relevant attributes facilitates visual search performance. For example, Maljkovic and Nakayama () showed that when observers search for a target defined by its color and report its shape, repetition of the target color speeds search, an effect known as priming of pop-out. While intertrial feature priming in search was initially thought to affect perceptual processes, the idea that it also affects postselection stages of processing is increasingly acknowledged. However, because in previous studies repetition of the motor response has typically been confounded with repetition of the response feature, it is not clear what mechanisms underlie the postselection effect of intertrial priming. In the present study, we dissociated the two repetition types. The results showed that repetition of the target-defining attribute from the previous trial affects selection of the motor response but not discrimination of the response attribute. The implications for current accounts of intertrial priming are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]