Abstract
An increase in the proportion of spatially cued trials in the context of the covert orienting paradigm increases the magnitude of the cuing effect. This proportion cued effect is widely interpreted to reflect a form of control. Specifically, it is argued that participants strategically allocate attention as a function of the utility of the spatial cue. Here, an alternative explanation of the proportion cued effect is proposed that does not require control. According to this account, the cue-target event forms a compound cue and the proportion cued manipulation produces a relative disparity in the frequency with which particular compound cues occur. Specifically, when the proportion of spatially cued trials is increased, the frequency of spatially cued cue-target events increases and the frequency of spatially miscued cue-target events decreases, thus increasing the magnitude of the cuing effect. The results of two experiments support this account.
Article PDF
References
Bartolomeo, P., Decaix, C., & Sieroff, E. (2007). The phenomenology of endogenous orienting. Consciousness & Cognition, 16, 144–161.
Bertelson, P., & Tisseyre, F. (1965). Choice reaction time as a function of stimulus versus response relative frequency of occurrence. Nature, 212, 1069–1070.
Bodner, G. E., & Masson, M. (2003). Beyond spreading activation: An influence of relatedness proportion on masked semantic priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 645–652.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analyses for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Danckert, J., Maruff, P., Crowe, S., & Currie, J. (1998). Inhibitory processes in covert orienting in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Neuropsychology, 12, 225–241.
Dosher, B. A., & Rosedale, G. S. (1997). Configural processing in memory retrieval: Multiple cues and ensemble representations. Cognitive Psychology, 33, 209–265.
Enns, J. T., & Brodeur, D. A. (1989). A developmental study of covert orienting to peripheral visual cues. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 48, 171–189.
Eriksen, C. W., & Yeh, Y. Y. (1985). Allocation of attention in the visual field. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 11, 583–587.
Hyman, R. (1953). Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45, 188–196.
Johnson, D. N., & Yantis, S. (1995). Allocating visual attention: Tests of a two-process model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 21, 1376–1390.
Kingstone, A. (1992). Combining expectancies. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 404A, 69–104.
Kingstone, A., & Klein, R. (1991). Combining shape and position expectancies: Hierarchical processing of selective inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 17, 512–519.
Klein, R. M. (1994). Perceptual-motor expectancies interact with covert visual orienting under conditions of endogenous but not exogenous control. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 167–181.
Kornblum, S. (1969). Sequential determinants of information processing in serial and discrete choice reaction time. Psychological Review, 76, 113–131.
LaBerge, D., Legrand, R., & Hobbie, R. K. (1969). Functional identification of perceptual and response biases in choice reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 79, 295–299.
Logan, G. (1988). Towards an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492–527.
Madden, D. J. (1992). Selective attention and visual search: Revision of an allocation model and application to age differences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 821–836.
Maruff, P., Danckert, J., Pantelis, C., & Currie, J. (1998). Saccadic and attentional abnormalities in patients with schizophrenia. Psychological Medicine, 28, 1091–1100.
Masson, M. E. J., & Loftus, G. R. (2003). Using confidence intervals for graphically based data interpretation. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 203–220.
Posner, M. I., Nissen, M. J., & Ogden, W. C. (1978). Attended and unattended processing modes: The role of set for spatial location. In H. L. Pick & I. J. Saltzman (Eds.), Modes of perceiving and processing information (pp. 137–157). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neurosciences, 13, 25–42.
Posner, M. I., & Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R.L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium (pp. 55–85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Psychology Software Tools (2002). E-Prime (Version 1.1) [Computer software]. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools.
Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G. (1988). A retrieval theory of priming in memory. Psychological Review, 95, 385–408.
Van Selst, M., & Jolicoeur, P. (1994). A solution to the effect of sample size on outlier elimination. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47A, 631–650.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This work was supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Canadian Graduate Scholarship to E.F.R. and operating grants to J.A.S. and D.B.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Risko, E.F., Blais, C., Stolz, J.A. et al. Covert orienting: A compound-cue account of the proportion cued effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 15, 123–127 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.1.123
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.1.123