Benefits from attention depend on the target type in location-precued discrimination.

In previous research, we found that precuing of attention to a target location greatly improved discrimination of targets that differed in line arrangement, but had little effect on discrimination of targets that differed in line orientation. In the present research, a number of other targets that represent various feature differences were used. The new data are consistent with and extend our earlier findings by showing that (1) there is some effect of precuing with all targets tested, and (2) the size of precuing effects varies in a complex way with the nature of the target. Moreover, the difficulty of the discrimination cannot explain the size of the precuing effects. A framework for understanding the events occurring during trials in the location-cuing paradigm is presented and applied to these results.

[1]  H. Egeth,et al.  Parallel versus serial processing in visual search: further evidence from subadditive effects of visual quality. , 1991 .

[2]  Stephen E. Fienberg,et al.  The analysis of cross-classified categorical data , 1980 .

[3]  M. Cheal,et al.  Importance of precue location in directing attention. , 1991, Acta psychologica.

[4]  J. Duncan,et al.  Visual search and stimulus similarity. , 1989, Psychological review.

[5]  M. Cheal,et al.  Attention Effects on Form Discrimination at Different Eccentricities , 1989, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[6]  M. Posner,et al.  On the selection of signals , 1973, Memory & cognition.

[7]  A. Treisman,et al.  Search asymmetry: a diagnostic for preattentive processing of separable features. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[8]  M. Cheal,et al.  Central and Peripheral Precuing of Forced-Choice Discrimination , 1991, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[9]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. , 1981 .

[10]  J Miller,et al.  Components of the location probability effect in visual search tasks. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  M. Cheal,et al.  Attention in visual search: Multiple search classes , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[12]  Anne Treisman,et al.  Features and objects in visual processing , 1986 .

[13]  M. Cheal,et al.  Does Attention Have Different Effects on Line Orientation and Line Arrangement Discrimination? , 1991, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[14]  B. Julesz.  THE ROLE OF TERMINATORS IN PREATTENTIVE PERCEPTION , 1982 .

[15]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[16]  R. Näätänen,et al.  Foreperiod and simple reaction time. , 1981 .

[17]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Temporal and spatial characteristics of selective encoding from visual displays , 1972 .

[18]  M. Posner,et al.  Orienting of Attention* , 1980, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[19]  Howard S. Bashinski,et al.  Enhancement of perceptual sensitivity as the result of selectively attending to spatial locations , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  A Treisman,et al.  Feature analysis in early vision: evidence from search asymmetries. , 1988, Psychological review.

[21]  J. Henderson,et al.  Stimulus discrimination following covert attentional orienting to an exogenous cue. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[22]  W. P. Dixon,et al.  BMPD statistical software manual , 1988 .

[23]  D. Lyon,et al.  Large and rapid improvement in form discrimination accuracy following a location precue. , 1990, Acta psychologica.

[24]  G. Koch,et al.  Analysis of categorical data by linear models. , 1969, Biometrics.

[25]  M. Posner,et al.  Inhibition of return : Neural basis and function , 1985 .