Abstract

In Egly, Driver, and Rafal's (1994) seminal study, an attentional precue appeared either at the target location (valid), a different location within the same object (invalid-same), or on another object (invalid-different). Performance was best in the valid condition, reflecting the advance allocation of spatial-attention. In addition, performance was better in the invalid-same than invalid-different condition, reflecting object-based attention allocation. However, previous studies that used this paradigm did not include a baseline condition in which neither a specific object nor a specific location was indicated. It is, therefore, not clear whether this object-based effect reflects a 'genuine' performance benefit over baseline, or a reduction of the cost inflicted by allocating spatial attention to the wrong location. To examine these possibilities, the authors performed 3 experiments in which they added a neutral condition to the classical paradigm. The typical results were replicated, but performance was worse in the invalid-same than neutral condition. Hence, attending an object only reduced the cost of allocating attention to the wrong location. Importantly, because the different theoretical accounts of object-based effects generate different predictions regarding performance in the neutral condition, these findings pose various constraints on the different accounts. (PsycINFO Database Record

Full Text
Published version (Free)

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