Chastain G, Cheal M L
Department of Psychology, Boise State University, Boise, Idaho, 83725, USA.
Conscious Cogn. 1999 Dec;8(4):510-28. doi: 10.1006/ccog.1999.0413.
Endogenous and exogenous processes of attention have been inferred with different types of precues used in allocation of attention to a target location. In the present research, a comparison was made between the typical peripheral single-element precue (SEP), a central precue, and a multiple-element precue (MEP) in order to further understanding of the processes involved in allocation of attention. Two precues were used on each trial in these experiments. An abrupt-onset precue appeared with an SEP, an MEP, or a central precue and was followed 50 or 300 ms later by a screen containing a target and two distractor characters. The abrupt-onset precue and the other precue each could be valid or invalid in indicating the location of the target, as in the study by Juola, Koshino, and Warner (1995). Response times to the targets showed that validity effects of the abrupt-onset precue and the MEP or central precue were additive, whereas those of the abrupt-onset precue and the SEP were interactive. These data suggest that, like a central precue, an MEP is an endogenous precue that guides conscious control of attention and has its attentional effects at a different processing level from an SEP, which is an exogenous precue and may compete for attentional resources with an abrupt-onset precue.
通过在将注意力分配到目标位置时使用的不同类型的预提示，已经推断出注意力的内源性和外源性过程。在本研究中，对典型的外周单元素预提示（SEP）、中央预提示和多元素预提示（MEP）进行了比较，以便进一步了解注意力分配所涉及的过程。在这些实验中，每次试验使用两种预提示。一个突然出现的预提示与一个SEP、一个MEP或一个中央预提示一起出现，并在50或300毫秒后，出现一个包含目标和两个干扰字符的屏幕。如朱奥拉、小筱和华纳（1995年）的研究所表明的，突然出现的预提示和另一个预提示在指示目标位置时都可能是有效的或无效的。对目标的反应时间表明，突然出现的预提示与MEP或中央预提示的有效性效应是相加的，而突然出现的预提示与SEP的有效性效应是相互作用的。这些数据表明，与中央预提示一样，MEP是一种内源性预提示，它引导对注意力的有意识控制，并且其注意力效应发生在与SEP不同的处理水平上，SEP是一种外源性预提示，可能与突然出现的预提示竞争注意力资源。
