Abstract

We aimed to determine the suitability of a “new” procedure for detecting the existence of binding between a target’s identity and its location/response during its processing on a prime trial in a visuo-spatial task. Importantly, the method involved cueing the impending likelihood of a binding violation on a subsequent probe trial. If the latency increasing impact of a binding violation can be reduced or removed when the cue proved to be valid, RT reductions for Conditions that involved a binding violation would show a larger latency decrease than those which did not (relative to uninformative cue trials). This result pattern did not occur, even though data showed that the cue information was used for preparation (RT [valid cue] RT [invalid cue]). Either a target identity—location/response binding does not occur, or advance knowledge of its impending violation does not modulate the violation’s latency increase impact. In any event, the use of the cue procedure employed here to detect binding is not a viable one.

Highlights

  • IntroductionThe RT for this status change is significantly longer than when the same relevant processing does not undergo a status change

  • Individual mean reaction times were utilized for all analyses of variance (ANOVA)

  • Recall that the paired Conditions chosen for comparison in each ANOVA were selected on the basis that one contained a binding violation potential, the other did not; and that both have the same cue

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The RT for this status change is significantly longer than when the same relevant processing does not undergo a status change This holds whether the prime distractor is visible (non-masked) or phenomenally invisible (masked) (e.g., Fitzgeorge, Buckolz, & Khan, 2011; Schlaghecken et al, 2007). Distractor events are processed automatically, in spite of intentions/instructions not to do so. This processing is stored, and when later retrieved with the presentation of the probe trial, can interfere with related processing (i.e., the negative priming effect; Neill, Terry, & Valdes, 1994; Tipper, 2001)

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call