Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research 3/2010

01-05-2010 | Original Article

Spatial Stroop and spatial orienting: the role of onset versus offset cues

Auteurs: Chunming Luo, Juan Lupiáñez, Xiaolan Fu, Xuchu Weng

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 3/2010

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

The present study investigated whether offset cues have the same attentional consequences in the spatial Stroop effect as onset cues. Experiments 1 and 2 compared the attentional effects of onset–offset cues versus offset cues on the spatial Stroop effect, whereas Experiment 3 compared the attentional effects of onset versus offset cues. Across these experiments, independent of cue type (onset–offset or onset vs. offset) and even at long stimulus-onset asynchrony, attentional cueing did not revert into inhibition of return and was modulated by spatial Stroop with greater cueing effects for incongruent arrow’s direction and position. In addition, onset–offset or onset and offset cues produced comparable cueing effects in the location-direction congruent condition, and onset–offset or onset cues produced greater facilitation than offset cues in the incongruent condition. From a different perspective, peripheral cueing modulated the spatial Stroop effect in the same direction for onset–offset or onset and offset cues, although the reduction in spatial Stroop at cued locations was smaller with offset than with onset–offset or onset cues.
Literatuur
go back to reference Bartolomeo, P. (2007). Visual neglect. Current Opinion in Neurology, 20(4), 381–386. Bartolomeo, P. (2007). Visual neglect. Current Opinion in Neurology, 20(4), 381–386.
go back to reference Birmingham, E., & Pratt, J. (2005). Examining inhibition of return with onset and offset cues in the multiple cueing paradigm. Acta Psychologica, 118, 101–121.CrossRefPubMed Birmingham, E., & Pratt, J. (2005). Examining inhibition of return with onset and offset cues in the multiple cueing paradigm. Acta Psychologica, 118, 101–121.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Boot, W. R., Kramer, A. F., & Peterson, M. S. (2005). Oculomotor consequences of abrupt onsets and offsets: Onsets dominate oculomotor capture. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 910–928. Boot, W. R., Kramer, A. F., & Peterson, M. S. (2005). Oculomotor consequences of abrupt onsets and offsets: Onsets dominate oculomotor capture. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 910–928.
go back to reference Brockmole, J. R., & Henderson, J. M. (2005). Object appearance, disappearance, and attention prioritization in real-world scenes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 1061–1067. Brockmole, J. R., & Henderson, J. M. (2005). Object appearance, disappearance, and attention prioritization in real-world scenes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 1061–1067.
go back to reference Callejas, A., Lupiáñez, J., Funes, M. J., & Tudela, P. (2005). Modulations among the alerting, orienting and executive control networks. Experimental Brain Research, 167(1), 27–37.CrossRef Callejas, A., Lupiáñez, J., Funes, M. J., & Tudela, P. (2005). Modulations among the alerting, orienting and executive control networks. Experimental Brain Research, 167(1), 27–37.CrossRef
go back to reference Castel, A., Chasteen, A. L., Scialfa, C. T., & Pratt, J. (2003). Adult age differences in the time course of inhibition of return. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 58, 256–259. Castel, A., Chasteen, A. L., Scialfa, C. T., & Pratt, J. (2003). Adult age differences in the time course of inhibition of return. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 58, 256–259.
go back to reference Chica, A., Lupiáñez, J., Rossi, A., & Riggio, L. (submitted). Differential cuing effects for onset and offset cues under identical task sets. Chica, A., Lupiáñez, J., Rossi, A., & Riggio, L. (submitted). Differential cuing effects for onset and offset cues under identical task sets.
go back to reference Danziger, S., Kingstone, A., & Ward, R. (2001). Environmentally defined frames of reference: Their sensitivity to spatial cues and attention, and their time course. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 494–503.CrossRefPubMed Danziger, S., Kingstone, A., & Ward, R. (2001). Environmentally defined frames of reference: Their sensitivity to spatial cues and attention, and their time course. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 494–503.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Funes, M. J., & Lupiáñez, J. (2003). La teoría atencional de Posner: Una tarea para medir las funciones atencionales de orientación, alerta y control cognitivo y la interacción entre ellas. Psicothema, 15, 260–266. Funes, M. J., & Lupiáñez, J. (2003). La teoría atencional de Posner: Una tarea para medir las funciones atencionales de orientación, alerta y control cognitivo y la interacción entre ellas. Psicothema, 15, 260–266.
go back to reference Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (2005). The role of spatial attention and other processes on the magnitude and time course of cueing effects. Cognitive Processing—International Quarterly of Cognitive Science, 6, 98–116.CrossRef Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (2005). The role of spatial attention and other processes on the magnitude and time course of cueing effects. Cognitive Processing—International Quarterly of Cognitive Science, 6, 98–116.CrossRef
go back to reference Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (2007). Separate mechanisms recruited by exogenous and endogenous spatial cues: evidence from a spatial Stroop paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33(2), 248–262.CrossRef Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (2007). Separate mechanisms recruited by exogenous and endogenous spatial cues: evidence from a spatial Stroop paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33(2), 248–262.CrossRef
go back to reference Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (2008). The modulation of exogenous spatial cueing on spatial Stroop interference: evidence of a set for “cue–target event segregation”. Psicológica, 29, 65–95. Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (2008). The modulation of exogenous spatial cueing on spatial Stroop interference: evidence of a set for “cue–target event segregation”. Psicológica, 29, 65–95.
go back to reference Gawryszewski, L. G., Thomaz, T. G., Machado-Pinheiro, W., & Sant’Anna, A. N. (1994). Onset and offset of a visual cue have different effects on manual reaction time to a visual target. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 27, 67–73.PubMed Gawryszewski, L. G., Thomaz, T. G., Machado-Pinheiro, W., & Sant’Anna, A. N. (1994). Onset and offset of a visual cue have different effects on manual reaction time to a visual target. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 27, 67–73.PubMed
go back to reference Hommel, B. (1993a). The role of attention for the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 55, 208–222.CrossRefPubMed Hommel, B. (1993a). The role of attention for the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 55, 208–222.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Hommel, B. (1993b). The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: evidence for a temporal overlap. Psychological Research, 55, 280–290.CrossRef Hommel, B. (1993b). The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: evidence for a temporal overlap. Psychological Research, 55, 280–290.CrossRef
go back to reference Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: evidence for automatic integration of stimulus–response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5(1–2), 183–216.CrossRef Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: evidence for automatic integration of stimulus–response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5(1–2), 183–216.CrossRef
go back to reference Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(11), 494–500.CrossRefPubMed Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(11), 494–500.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Ivanoff, J., Klein, R. M., & Lupiáñez, J. (2002). Inhibition of return interacts with the Simon effect: an omnibus analysis and its implications. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 318–327. Ivanoff, J., Klein, R. M., & Lupiáñez, J. (2002). Inhibition of return interacts with the Simon effect: an omnibus analysis and its implications. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 318–327.
go back to reference Jonides, J., & Yantis, S. (1988). Uniqueness of abrupt visual onset in capturing attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 43, 346–354. Jonides, J., & Yantis, S. (1988). Uniqueness of abrupt visual onset in capturing attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 43, 346–354.
go back to reference Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., & Gibbs, B. (1992). The reviewing of object files: object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 175–219.CrossRefPubMed Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., & Gibbs, B. (1992). The reviewing of object files: object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 175–219.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Lu, C.-H., & Proctor, R. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: a review of the Simon effect and congruency effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 174–207. Lu, C.-H., & Proctor, R. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: a review of the Simon effect and congruency effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 174–207.
go back to reference Luo, C., Lupiáñez, J., Funes, M. J., & Fu, X. (2009). Modulation of spatial Stroop by object-based attention but not by space-based attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. Luo, C., Lupiáñez, J., Funes, M. J., & Fu, X. (2009). Modulation of spatial Stroop by object-based attention but not by space-based attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology.
go back to reference Lupiáñez, J., & Chica, A. B. (submitted). Inhibition of return and attentional disengagement. Lupiáñez, J., & Chica, A. B. (submitted). Inhibition of return and attentional disengagement.
go back to reference Lupiáñez, J., & Funes, M. J. (2005). Peripheral spatial cues modulate spatial Stroop interference: analyzing the “locus” of the cueing modulation. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 727–752.CrossRef Lupiáñez, J., & Funes, M. J. (2005). Peripheral spatial cues modulate spatial Stroop interference: analyzing the “locus” of the cueing modulation. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 727–752.CrossRef
go back to reference Lupiáñez, J., Milan, E. G., Tornay, F. J., Madrid, E., & Tudela, P. (1997). Does IOR occur in discrimination tasks? Yes, it does, but later. Perception and Psychophysics, 59(8), 1241–1254.PubMed Lupiáñez, J., Milan, E. G., Tornay, F. J., Madrid, E., & Tudela, P. (1997). Does IOR occur in discrimination tasks? Yes, it does, but later. Perception and Psychophysics, 59(8), 1241–1254.PubMed
go back to reference Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (1999). Inhibition of return and the attentional set for integrating versus differentiating information. The Journal o f General Psychology, 126(4), 392–418.CrossRef Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (1999). Inhibition of return and the attentional set for integrating versus differentiating information. The Journal o f General Psychology, 126(4), 392–418.CrossRef
go back to reference Lupiáñez, J., Milliken, B., Solano, C., Weaver, B., & Tipper, S. P. (2001). On the strategic modulation of the time course of facilitation and inhibition of return. The Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 54(3), 753–773.CrossRef Lupiáñez, J., Milliken, B., Solano, C., Weaver, B., & Tipper, S. P. (2001). On the strategic modulation of the time course of facilitation and inhibition of return. The Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 54(3), 753–773.CrossRef
go back to reference Lupiáñez, J., Ruz, M., Funes, M. J., & Milliken, B. (2007). The manifestation of attentional capture: facilitation or IOR depending on task demands. Psychological Research, 71(1), 77–91.CrossRefPubMed Lupiáñez, J., Ruz, M., Funes, M. J., & Milliken, B. (2007). The manifestation of attentional capture: facilitation or IOR depending on task demands. Psychological Research, 71(1), 77–91.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Posner, M. I., & Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X: control of language processes (pp. 531–556). Hillsdale: Erlbaum. Posner, M. I., & Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X: control of language processes (pp. 531–556). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
go back to reference Posner, M. I., Rafal, R. D., Choate, L. S., & Vaughan, J. (1985). Inhibition of return: neural basis and function. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2, 211–228.CrossRef Posner, M. I., Rafal, R. D., Choate, L. S., & Vaughan, J. (1985). Inhibition of return: neural basis and function. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2, 211–228.CrossRef
go back to reference Pratt, J., & Hirshhorn, M. (2003). Examining the time course of facilitation and inhibition with simultaneous onset and offset cues. Psychological Research, 67, 261–265.CrossRefPubMed Pratt, J., & Hirshhorn, M. (2003). Examining the time course of facilitation and inhibition with simultaneous onset and offset cues. Psychological Research, 67, 261–265.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Pratt, J., & McAuliffe, J. (2001). The effects of onsets and offsets on visual attention. Psychological Research, 65, 185–191.CrossRefPubMed Pratt, J., & McAuliffe, J. (2001). The effects of onsets and offsets on visual attention. Psychological Research, 65, 185–191.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Pratt, J., Theeuwes, J., & Donk, M. (2007). Offsets and prioritizing the selection of new elements in search displays: more evidence for attentional capture in the preview effect. Visual Cognition, 15, 133–148.CrossRef Pratt, J., Theeuwes, J., & Donk, M. (2007). Offsets and prioritizing the selection of new elements in search displays: more evidence for attentional capture in the preview effect. Visual Cognition, 15, 133–148.CrossRef
go back to reference Pratt, J., & Trottier, L. (2005). Pro-saccades and anti-saccades to onset and offset targets. Vision Research, 45, 765–774.CrossRefPubMed Pratt, J., & Trottier, L. (2005). Pro-saccades and anti-saccades to onset and offset targets. Vision Research, 45, 765–774.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Proctor, R. W., Lu, C. H., & Van Zandt, T. (1992). Enhancement of the Simon effect by response precuing. Acta Psychologica, 81, 53–74.CrossRefPubMed Proctor, R. W., Lu, C. H., & Van Zandt, T. (1992). Enhancement of the Simon effect by response precuing. Acta Psychologica, 81, 53–74.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Rastelli, F., Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., Duret, C., & Bartolomeo, P. (2008). Left visual neglect: is the disengage deficit Space– or object–based? Experimental Brain Research, 187(3), 439–446. Rastelli, F., Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., Duret, C., & Bartolomeo, P. (2008). Left visual neglect: is the disengage deficit Space– or object–based? Experimental Brain Research, 187(3), 439–446.
go back to reference Reuter-Lorenz, P. A., Jha, A. P., & Rosenquist, J. N. (1996). What is inhibited in inhibition of return? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, 367–378.CrossRef Reuter-Lorenz, P. A., Jha, A. P., & Rosenquist, J. N. (1996). What is inhibited in inhibition of return? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, 367–378.CrossRef
go back to reference Riggio, L., Bello, A., & Umilta, C. (1998). Inhibitory and facilitatory effects of cue onset and offset. Psychological Research, 61, 107–118.CrossRefPubMed Riggio, L., Bello, A., & Umilta, C. (1998). Inhibitory and facilitatory effects of cue onset and offset. Psychological Research, 61, 107–118.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Rubichi, S., Nicoletti, R., Iani, C., & Umilta, C. (1997). The Simon effect occurs in relation to the direction of an attention shift. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 1353–1364.CrossRef Rubichi, S., Nicoletti, R., Iani, C., & Umilta, C. (1997). The Simon effect occurs in relation to the direction of an attention shift. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 1353–1364.CrossRef
go back to reference Samuel, A. G., & Weiner, S. K. (2001). Attentional consequences of object appearance and disappearance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(6), 1433–1451.CrossRefPubMed Samuel, A. G., & Weiner, S. K. (2001). Attentional consequences of object appearance and disappearance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(6), 1433–1451.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Stoffer, T. H. (1991). Attentional focusing and spatial stimulus–response compatibility. Psychological Research, 53, 127–135.CrossRefPubMed Stoffer, T. H. (1991). Attentional focusing and spatial stimulus–response compatibility. Psychological Research, 53, 127–135.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Taylor, T. L., & Ivanoff, J. (2005). Inhibition of return and repetition priming effects in localization and discrimination tasks. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 75–89.PubMed Taylor, T. L., & Ivanoff, J. (2005). Inhibition of return and repetition priming effects in localization and discrimination tasks. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 75–89.PubMed
go back to reference Verfaellie, M., Bowers, D., & Heilman, K. M. (1988). Attentional factors in the occurrence of stimulus–response compatibility effects. Neuropsychologia, 26, 435–444.CrossRefPubMed Verfaellie, M., Bowers, D., & Heilman, K. M. (1988). Attentional factors in the occurrence of stimulus–response compatibility effects. Neuropsychologia, 26, 435–444.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Vingilis-Jaremko, L., Ferber, S., & Pratt, J. (2008). Better late than never: how onsets and offsets influence prior entry and exit. Psychological Research, 72, 443–450.CrossRefPubMed Vingilis-Jaremko, L., Ferber, S., & Pratt, J. (2008). Better late than never: how onsets and offsets influence prior entry and exit. Psychological Research, 72, 443–450.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Yantis, S., & Jonides, J. (1996). Attentional capture by abrupt onsets: New perceptual objects or visual masking? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 1505–1513.CrossRefPubMed Yantis, S., & Jonides, J. (1996). Attentional capture by abrupt onsets: New perceptual objects or visual masking? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 1505–1513.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Zimba, L. D., & Brito, C. F. (1995). Attention precuing and Simon effects: a test of the attention-coding account of the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 58, 102–118.CrossRef Zimba, L. D., & Brito, C. F. (1995). Attention precuing and Simon effects: a test of the attention-coding account of the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 58, 102–118.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Spatial Stroop and spatial orienting: the role of onset versus offset cues
Auteurs
Chunming Luo
Juan Lupiáñez
Xiaolan Fu
Xuchu Weng
Publicatiedatum
01-05-2010
Uitgeverij
Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in
Psychological Research / Uitgave 3/2010
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-009-0253-z

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2010

Psychological Research 3/2010 Naar de uitgave