title: Are spatial and dimensional attention separate? evidence from Posner, Stroop, and Eriksen tasks.
abstract: Do various operational definitions of visual attention tap the same underlying process? To address this question, we probed visual selective attention using orientation of attention, flanker, and Stroop tasks. These were embedded in combined designs that enabled assessment of each effect, as well as their interaction. For the orientation task, performance was poorer at unexpected than at expected locations. The flanker effects also differed across the two locations. In contrast, the Stroop effects were comparable at expected and unexpected locations. We conclude that spatial attention (tapped by the orientation and the flanker tasks) and dimensional attention (tapped by the Stroop task) engage separate processes of visual selection, both of which are needed in normal attention processing.
authors.affiliation: The Open University of Israel, Ra'anana, Israel. eranch@openu.ac.il
authors.forename: Eran
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Chajut
authors.forename: Asi
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Schupak
authors.forename: Daniel
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Algom
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D001288:Attention; D003118:Color Perception; D003220:Conflict, Psychological; D004192:Discrimination, Psychological; D005260:Female; D005364:Field Dependence-Independence; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009949:Orientation; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D011930:Reaction Time; D012660:Semantics; D012858:Size Perception; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1982 Aug;8(4):562-81
references.pmid: 6214608
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 1983 Dec;112(4):516-40
references.pmid: 6229597
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2001 Apr;27(2):494-503
references.pmid: 11318063
references.citation: Psychol Bull. 1991 Mar;109(2):163-203
references.pmid: 2034749
references.citation: Science. 2000 Jun 9;288(5472):1835-8
references.pmid: 10846167
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 1996 Sep;24(5):557-72
references.pmid: 8870527
references.citation: J Exp Psychol. 1980 Jun;109(2):160-74
references.pmid: 7381367
references.citation: J Cogn Neurosci. 2002 Apr 1;14(3):340-7
references.pmid: 11970796
references.citation: Annu Rev Neurosci. 1990;13:25-42
references.pmid: 2183676
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol. 1980 Feb;32(1):3-25
references.pmid: 7367577
references.citation: Psychol Res. 1993;56(1):14-25
references.pmid: 8310101
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1986 Oct;40(4):225-40
references.pmid: 3786090
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2001 Jul;108(3):624-52
references.pmid: 11488380
references.citation: Neuropsychologia. 2004;42(8):1029-40
references.pmid: 15093142
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2006 Aug;32(4):826-39
references.pmid: 16846282
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1983 Jan;33(1):1-10
references.pmid: 6844087
references.citation: Neuroimage. 2005 Jun;26(2):471-9
references.pmid: 15907304
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2003 Aug;65(6):888-900
references.pmid: 14528898
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1992 Nov;18(4):1030-44
references.pmid: 1431742
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2004 Oct;111(4):880-913
references.pmid: 15482066
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2003 Jul;110(3):422-71
references.pmid: 12885110
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1986 Nov;12(4):476-83
references.pmid: 2946804
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1983 Aug;9(4):497-509
references.pmid: 6224888
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2000 Jun;26(3):997-1017
references.pmid: 10884006
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2005 Mar;9(3):99-103
references.pmid: 15737817
references.citation: Brain Cogn. 2004 Apr;54(3):225-7
references.pmid: 15050779
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 1993 Sep;21(5):627-45
references.pmid: 8412715
references.citation: Atten Percept Psychophys. 2009 Feb;71(2):314-27
references.pmid: 19304621