Biomedical subjects

Jennifer A Stolz

Publications and source records attributed to Jennifer A Stolz.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Basic processes in reading: is visual word recognition obligatory?

Visual word recognition is commonly argued to be automatic in the sense that it is obligatory and ballistic. The present experiments combined Stroop and visual search paradigms to provide a novel test of this claim. An array of three, five, or seven words including one colored target (a word in Experiments 1 and 2, a bar in Experiment 3) was presented to participants. An irrelevant color word also appeared in the display and was either integrated with or separated from the colored target. The participants classified the color of the single colored item in Experiments 1 and 3 and determined whether a target color was present or absent in Experiment 2. A Stroop effect was observed in Experiment 1 when the color word and the color target were integral, but not when the color word and the color target were separated. No Stroop effect was observed in Experiment 2. Visual word recognition is contingent on both the distribution of spatial attention and task demands.

Attention↗

PubMed2004

Interactive activation in visual word recognition: constraints imposed by the joint effects of spatial attention and semantics.

Two lexical-decision experiments investigated the effects of semantic priming and stimulus intensity when target location varied and was cued by an abrupt onset. In Experiment 1, the spatial cue was a good predictor of target location, and in Experiment 2 it was not. The results indicate that word recognition processes were postponed until spatial attention was focused on the target and that whether attention further affected word recognition depended on cue validity. The joint effects of cue validity and priming interacted when cue validity was high but were additive when cue validity was low. The joint effects of stimulus intensity and semantic priming also varied according to cue validity (i.e., interactive when high and additive when low). The results are discussed in terms of their implications for visual word recognition, the distinction between exogenous and endogenous spatial attention, and how attention is affected by visual word recognition processes.

Attention↗

PubMed2004

Changing features do not guide attention in change detection: evidence from a spatial cuing paradigm.

Smilek, Eastwood, and Merikle (2000) demonstrated that the detection of change was facilitated when the target character changed in many rather than few of its features. Specifically, the function relating search response time to display set size was shallower when more features changed than when fewer features changed. The researchers interpreted these results as indicating that large feature changes provide preattentive guidance of focal attention to the location of the change. We tested this preattentive guidance hypothesis by examining change detection performance in the context of a spatial cuing paradigm. The hypothesis predicts that (1) the cost on invalidly cued trials should be less when more features change than when fewer features change, and (2) the features manipulation should have no effect on validly cued trials. In contrast to these predictions, our results show that cuing effects are equivalent across all levels of feature change and that a robust effect of the features manipulation is observable for both validly and invalidly cued trials. We argue that large feature changes do not provide preattentive guidance and in fact can be detected more readily after attention is already in place at the target location.

Attention↗