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.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 69-77 |
Number of pages | 9 |
Journal | Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance |
Volume | 43 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 1 Jan 2017 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2016 American Psychological Association.
Keywords
- Benefit
- Cost
- Neutral cue
- Object-based attention
- Spatial cueing
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
- Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
- Behavioral Neuroscience