Abstract
Twelve field-dependent (FD) and 12 field-independent (FI) males were administered 260 trials of a signal detection task in four phases. Signal type (auditory, visual, or no signal) was crossed with four sets of imaging treatments (pure visual representations, pure sounds without visual counterparts, and two sets representing sounds with visual counterparts). Detection of a signal in isolation was 90% accurate, as was the detection of no signal while imaging. Cross-modality imaging interfered with detection of the stimulus but to a significantly lesser extent than did same-modality imaging. In all detection/imaging treatments, FIs were significantly more sensitive to the signal than were FDs; however, FDs and FIs did not differ in accuracy of detecting isolated signals. The results are discussed in terms of the commonalities shared by perception and imaging as they appear in the Perky effect and cognitive style.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
