You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Evidence for Processing Letters at Uncued Locations
Paula Goolkasian and David K. Garver
The American Journal of Psychology
Vol. 108, No. 2 (Summer, 1995), pp. 235-253
Published by: University of Illinois Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1423130
Page Count: 19
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Experimentation, Error rates, Perceptual localization, Information search, Mental stimulation, Tractors, Empirical evidence, Men, Volunteerism, Cognitive psychology
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
The sequential cuing procedure introduced by Eriksen, Webb, and Fournier (1990) was used to study the processing of stimuli presented at uncued locations of a multielement display. The present studies differed from that investigation by varying target/distractor similarity. A second and third experiment investigated the effect of task difficulty and the presence of the first cue. For all three experiments, information presented in the original display at the second cued location varied as a function of experimental condition. Distractor and target change conditions differed from the control condition in that the target appeared after a 75-ms preview of the original display. The findings showed that the effect of order of cuing and preview varied with the kind of background items. The more dissimilar the target from the background items, the smaller the cuing effect, the larger the preview effect, and the more evidence for processing items from uncued locations of the display. The results are consistent with Duncan and Humphreys's (1989) revised late selection theory.
The American Journal of Psychology © 1995 University of Illinois Press