{"title":"部分报告,视觉匹配和搜索作为线索延迟的函数。","authors":"T Schulz","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Three experiments are reported where a cue that was varied in time indicated a letter pair (or pairs) in a circular display with six pairs. The S had either to report letters from a pair (Exp. 1) or to decide about the equality of the letter pair (Exp. 2) or to decide about the presence of a target letter given with various delays (Exp. 3). Exp. 1 shows a short-lived partial report superiority, the loss being primarily due to adjacency errors. In Exp. 2 a short loss in the correct same decisions, but almost no loss in the correct \"differents\" was observed. In spite of its search task character, Exp. 3 showed the same loss as Exp. 1, 2. In all experiments performance recovered with the latest ISI (1 sec). The results of Exp. 1 can be explained by post-categorical accounts of the partial report (PR-) effect (loss of positional information), those of Exp. 2 by visual confusion, i. e. a precategorical account, those of Exp. 3 by neither. The results suggest that the PR-effect might be due to non-visible persistence rather but to visible persistence. A theory of early visual processing which would also explain the PR-effect is still lacking.</p>","PeriodicalId":75529,"journal":{"name":"Archiv fur Psychologie","volume":"141 3","pages":"213-35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1989-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Partial report, visual matching, and search as a function of cue-delay.\",\"authors\":\"T Schulz\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Three experiments are reported where a cue that was varied in time indicated a letter pair (or pairs) in a circular display with six pairs. The S had either to report letters from a pair (Exp. 1) or to decide about the equality of the letter pair (Exp. 2) or to decide about the presence of a target letter given with various delays (Exp. 3). Exp. 1 shows a short-lived partial report superiority, the loss being primarily due to adjacency errors. In Exp. 2 a short loss in the correct same decisions, but almost no loss in the correct \\\"differents\\\" was observed. In spite of its search task character, Exp. 3 showed the same loss as Exp. 1, 2. In all experiments performance recovered with the latest ISI (1 sec). The results of Exp. 1 can be explained by post-categorical accounts of the partial report (PR-) effect (loss of positional information), those of Exp. 2 by visual confusion, i. e. a precategorical account, those of Exp. 3 by neither. The results suggest that the PR-effect might be due to non-visible persistence rather but to visible persistence. A theory of early visual processing which would also explain the PR-effect is still lacking.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75529,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archiv fur Psychologie\",\"volume\":\"141 3\",\"pages\":\"213-35\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1989-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archiv fur Psychologie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archiv fur Psychologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Partial report, visual matching, and search as a function of cue-delay.
Three experiments are reported where a cue that was varied in time indicated a letter pair (or pairs) in a circular display with six pairs. The S had either to report letters from a pair (Exp. 1) or to decide about the equality of the letter pair (Exp. 2) or to decide about the presence of a target letter given with various delays (Exp. 3). Exp. 1 shows a short-lived partial report superiority, the loss being primarily due to adjacency errors. In Exp. 2 a short loss in the correct same decisions, but almost no loss in the correct "differents" was observed. In spite of its search task character, Exp. 3 showed the same loss as Exp. 1, 2. In all experiments performance recovered with the latest ISI (1 sec). The results of Exp. 1 can be explained by post-categorical accounts of the partial report (PR-) effect (loss of positional information), those of Exp. 2 by visual confusion, i. e. a precategorical account, those of Exp. 3 by neither. The results suggest that the PR-effect might be due to non-visible persistence rather but to visible persistence. A theory of early visual processing which would also explain the PR-effect is still lacking.