2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.11.030
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What goes through the gate? Exploring interference with visual feature binding

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

15
87
3

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(107 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
15
87
3
Order By: Relevance
“…To recapitulate, we hypothesised there would be a recency effect in the control condition, a reduced recency effect with an implausible suffix, and an even more reduced recency effect with a plausible suffix. This would show that the findings of Ueno, Mate et al (2011) extend to sequential displays, and would confirm our assumptions about the role of feature-based perceptual filtering in excluding a stimulus suffix from further processing.…”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 76%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To recapitulate, we hypothesised there would be a recency effect in the control condition, a reduced recency effect with an implausible suffix, and an even more reduced recency effect with a plausible suffix. This would show that the findings of Ueno, Mate et al (2011) extend to sequential displays, and would confirm our assumptions about the role of feature-based perceptual filtering in excluding a stimulus suffix from further processing.…”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 76%
“…The only difference was that Ueno, Mate et al (2011) presented the memory items simultaneously at separate locations whereas here they were presented one-by-one in a randomly determined order using a 3 (plausible suffix, implausible suffix, control) ! 4 (serial position) design.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Adapted from Ueno et al (2011;see also Allen, Baddeley, et al, 2014), this response type involves selection of a feature that was associated with a different pairing in the presented sequence. It can be viewed as a binding error as it represents correct feature memory, but a failure to identify the appropriate pairing in which it was encountered.…”
Section: Insert Figure 2 About Herementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, we explored the developmental trajectory across school children and young adult groups on the task measuring working memory for visual and auditory-verbal information binding. We examined accuracy and error patterns that were produced in the working memory binding task (e.g., Ueno, Mate, Allen, Hitch, & Baddeley, 2011), in order to help specify the nature of developmental improvements.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consequently, the latest description of the WM model characterizes many forms of binding as developing within the EB or feeding into it from other subcomponents of WM, in both cases without the intervention of executive attentional processes. Instead, basic, rule-governed, and automatic filtering mechanisms are proposed, which function to select which features are held as bound representations (Ueno, Mate, Allen, Hitch, & Baddeley, 2011), with LTM support capable of impacting on WM representations independently of attentional control . This specific aspect of the EB-its lack of a requirement for attention-is a potential point of distinction between Baddeley's approach and Cowan's: The focus-of-attention model implies a more important role for explicit attention in feature binding of this type, and the question of whether attention is critical in binding remains disputed due to reports of contradictory findings, such as the observation that binding between individual letters and locations was reduced by a tone memory load (Elsley & Parmentier, 2009).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%