Yeshurun Yaffa, Rashal Einat
Psychology Department, University of Haifa.
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2017 Jan;43(1):69-77. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000308. Epub 2016 Nov 3.
In Egly, Driver, and Rafal's (1994) seminal study, an attentional precue appeared either at the target location (valid), a different location within the same object (invalid-same), or on another object (invalid-different). Performance was best in the valid condition, reflecting the advance allocation of spatial-attention. In addition, performance was better in the invalid-same than invalid-different condition, reflecting object-based attention allocation. However, previous studies that used this paradigm did not include a baseline condition in which neither a specific object nor a specific location was indicated. It is, therefore, not clear whether this object-based effect reflects a 'genuine' performance benefit over baseline, or a reduction of the cost inflicted by allocating spatial attention to the wrong location. To examine these possibilities, the authors performed 3 experiments in which they added a neutral condition to the classical paradigm. The typical results were replicated, but performance was worse in the invalid-same than neutral condition. Hence, attending an object only reduced the cost of allocating attention to the wrong location. Importantly, because the different theoretical accounts of object-based effects generate different predictions regarding performance in the neutral condition, these findings pose various constraints on the different accounts. (PsycINFO Database Record
在埃格利、德赖弗和拉法尔(1994年)的开创性研究中,一个注意力预线索出现在目标位置(有效)、同一物体内的不同位置(无效-相同)或另一个物体上(无效-不同)。在有效条件下表现最佳,这反映了空间注意力的预先分配。此外,在无效-相同条件下的表现优于无效-不同条件,这反映了基于物体的注意力分配。然而,以往使用该范式的研究并未包括既不指明特定物体也不指明特定位置的基线条件。因此,尚不清楚这种基于物体的效应是反映了相对于基线的“真正”表现优势,还是反映了将空间注意力分配到错误位置所带来的成本降低。为了探究这些可能性,作者进行了3项实验,在经典范式中增加了一个中性条件。典型结果得到了重复,但在无效-相同条件下的表现比中性条件更差。因此,关注一个物体只会降低将注意力分配到错误位置的成本。重要的是,由于对基于物体效应的不同理论解释对中性条件下的表现产生了不同的预测,这些发现对不同的解释构成了各种限制。(《心理学文摘数据库记录》