Perceptual Dimensional Constraints in Response Selection Processes

Cohen, Asher; Shoup, Rachel

doi:10.1006/cogp.1997.0648

Cited by 130 publications

(235 citation statements)

References 93 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

199

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It seems that these feature cues assign a larger weight to a specific feature-to-response mapping. As noted in Cohen and Shoup (1997), "the response selection system can have direct access to the feature maps within each dimension" (p. 174).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response Selection Modulates Visual Search Within and Across Dimensions.

Mortier¹,

Theeuwes²,

Starreveld³

2005

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In feature search tasks, uncertainty about the dimension on which targets differ from the nontargets hampers search performance relative to a situation in which this dimension is known in advance. Typically, these cross-dimensional costs are associated with less efficient guidance of attention to the target. In the present study, participants either had to perform a feature search task or had to perform a nonsearch task, that is, respond to a target presented without nontargets. The target varied either in one dimension or across dimensions. The results showed similar effects both in search and nonsearch conditions: Preknowledge of the target dimension gave shorter response times than when the dimension was unknown. Similar results were found using a trial-by-trial cueing. It is concluded that effects that typically have been attributed to early top-down modulation of attentional guidance may represent effects that occur later in processing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response Selection Modulates Visual Search Within and Across Dimensions.

Mortier¹,

Theeuwes²,

Starreveld³

2005

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A post-selective response stage account of visual dimension weighting (Cohen and Magen, 1999;Cohen and Feintuch, 2002;Feintuch and Cohen, 2002;Cohen and Shoup, 1997;Mortier et al, 2005;Theeuwes et al, in press;Theeuwes, 1992Theeuwes, , 1996 would predict no activation changes in visual input areas to accompany visual dimension changes because perceptual and visual -attentional processes are assumed to remain unchanged. Instead, this account would predict dimension-change-related activation in brain areas supporting response selection and thus an overlap between dimension-change-and response-change-related activation in these areas.…”

Section: Relation Of Dimension-change-and Response-change-elicited Acmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In more detail, Mü ller and his colleagues (e.g., Mü ller et al, 1995Mü ller et al, , 2003Found and Mü ller, 1996;Krummenacher et al, 2001Krummenacher et al, , 2002a interpreted these effects as arising at a pre-attentive perceptual stage of processing that guides the allocation of focal attention to the target (based on preattentively computed feature difference signals). This interpretation has recently been challenged by Cohen (Cohen and Magen, 1999;Cohen and Feintuch, 2002;Feintuch and Cohen, 2002;Cohen and Shoup, 1997) and Theeuwes (Mortier et al, 2005;Theeuwes et al, in press; see also Theeuwes, 1992Theeuwes, , 1996, who argued that the dimension change effects reflect post-selective response stage processes, which follow the allocation of focal attention to the singleton feature target (with attentional allocation itself being uninfluenced by dimension weighting). The present fMRI study was designed to dissociate perceptual from response-related processes in dimensional weighting in order to broaden the data base for making a decision among the various theoretical alternatives.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selective and interactive neural correlates of visual dimension changes and response changes

Pollmann

Weidner

Müller³

et al. 2006

NeuroImage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In an event-related fMRI study, we investigated the neural correlates of visual dimension and response changes. We used a compound task, which required target selection by a singleton feature, a unique color or motion direction, before the appropriate motor response, which was determined by target orientation, could be selected. Both types of change elicited distinct patterns of activation, with dimension-changerelated activation primarily in posterior visual areas and responserelated activation primarily in motor-related areas of the parietal and frontal cortices. Response-change-related activation was delayed by about 1 s relative to dimension-change-related activation, suggesting that the latter is elicited by perceptual processes, whereas the former reflects response-related or post-response processes. Although dimension changes and response changes rely on different processes, they are not independent: response facilitation was observed for combined dimension and response repetitions, this facilitation, however, was disrupted by dimension changes. D

show abstract

“…The effect of irrelevant feature dimensions has been the focus of earlier studies by Cohen and colleagues (Cohen & Shoup, 1997;Feintuch & Cohen, 2002). In a series of elegant studies that used a modified version of the flanker paradigm (B.…”

Section: Cohen's Da Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on their results, Cohen and Shoup (1997) proposed a dimensional-action (DA) model to explain when relevant and irrelevant features from targets and distractors will affect responses, and when they will not. In the DA model, there is a separate decision mechanism for each feature dimension.…”

Section: Cohen's Da Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

When does visual attention select all features of a distractor?

Chen

Cave

2006

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What happens after visual attention is allocated to an object? Although many theories of attention assume that all of its features are selected and processed, there has been little direct evidence that an irrelevant feature dimension of an attended nontarget is processed. In 5 experiments presented here, the authors used a singleton paradigm to investigate the effect of attention on nontarget objects. Participants made a speeded feature discrimination of a target for which the response was either compatible or incompatible with an irrelevant feature dimension of a distractor. The results show that the irrelevant distractor features were processed to the point that they interfered with the response to the target. The response compatibility effect was observed even when the location of the target or the distractor was invariant, although it was much weaker when both locations were invariant. These results demonstrate that in many circumstances, an attended distractor is completely selected and fully processed, and the complete processing of distractors depends on a number of factors, many of which are related to the strength of attention to the distractor.

show abstract

Perceptual Dimensional Constraints in Response Selection Processes

Cited by 130 publications

References 93 publications

Response Selection Modulates Visual Search Within and Across Dimensions.

Response Selection Modulates Visual Search Within and Across Dimensions.

Selective and interactive neural correlates of visual dimension changes and response changes

When does visual attention select all features of a distractor?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About