PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 14651295

Cross-task strategic effects.

Kathleen Rastle·Sachiko Kinoshita·Stephen J Lupker·Max Coltheart
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

When easy and difficult items are mixed together, their reading aloud latencies become more homogeneous relative to their presentation in unmixed ("pure") conditions (Lupker, Brown, & Colombo, 1997). We report two experiments designed to investigate the nature of the mechanism that underlies this list composition, or blocking, effect. In Experiment 1, we replicated Lupker et al.'s (1997) blocking effect in the reading aloud task and extended these findings to the visual lexical decision task. In Experiment 2, we found that blocking effects generalized across tasks: The characteristics of stimuli in a visual lexical decision task influenced reading aloud latencies, and vice versa, when visual lexical decision and reading aloud trials were presented alternately in the same experiment. We discuss implications of these results within time-criterion (Lupker et al., 1997) and strength-of-processing (Kello & Plaut, 2000, 2003) theories of strategic processing in reading.

Explore related subjects

Decision MakingHumansReaction TimeReadingRecognition, PsychologyVisual PerceptionVocabularyJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Kathleen Rastle, Sachiko Kinoshita, Stephen J Lupker, Max Coltheart. 2003. Cross-task strategic effects.. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03196441

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Computer utilization and clinical judgment in psychological assessment reports.

The process of assessment report writing is a complex one, involving both the statistical evaluation of data and clinical methods of data interpretation to appropriately answer referral questions. Today, a computer often analyzes data generated in a psychological assessment, at least in part. In this article, the author focuses on the interaction between the decision-making processes of human clinicians and the test interpretations that are computer-based. The benefits and problems with computers in assessment are highlighted and are presented alongside the research on the validity of automated assessment, as well as research comparing clinicians and computers in the decision-making process. The author concludes that clinical judgment and computer-based test interpretation each have weaknesses. However, by using certain strategies to reduce clinicians' susceptibility to errors in decision making and to ensure that only valid computer-based test interpretations are used, clinicians can optimize the accuracy of conclusions that they draw in their assessment report.

Decision Making↗
PubMed2006

Rural/urban differences in accounts of patients' initial decisions to consult primary care.

In the UK, patients in urban areas consult primary health care more than rural patients for both trivial and serious conditions. This study, involving focus groups and interviews, examined rural/urban differences in accounts of patients' intentions around initial decisions to consult general practice. Findings suggest 'relationships' between doctors and patients and easier access to appointments could affect consulting in rural areas, while decision-making for urban patients tended to be more consumerist. Perceptions about access to different health services meant rural patients' decision-making in out-of-hours emergencies was complex. Rural/urban differences in demand could be affected by change in UK primary care provision.

Decision Making↗