title: Spatial Stroop and spatial orienting: the role of onset versus offset cues.
abstract: The present study investigated whether offset cues have the same attentional consequences in the spatial Stroop effect as onset cues. Experiments 1 and 2 compared the attentional effects of onset-offset cues versus offset cues on the spatial Stroop effect, whereas Experiment 3 compared the attentional effects of onset versus offset cues. Across these experiments, independent of cue type (onset-offset or onset vs. offset) and even at long stimulus-onset asynchrony, attentional cueing did not revert into inhibition of return and was modulated by spatial Stroop with greater cueing effects for incongruent arrow's direction and position. In addition, onset-offset or onset and offset cues produced comparable cueing effects in the location-direction congruent condition, and onset-offset or onset cues produced greater facilitation than offset cues in the incongruent condition. From a different perspective, peripheral cueing modulated the spatial Stroop effect in the same direction for onset-offset or onset and offset cues, although the reduction in spatial Stroop at cued locations was smaller with offset than with onset-offset or onset cues.
authors.affiliation: State Key Laboratory of Brain and Cognitive Science, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 4A Datun Road, Chaoyang District, 100101 Beijing, China.
authors.forename: Chunming
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Luo
authors.forename: Juan
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Lupiáñez
authors.forename: Xiaolan
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Fu
authors.forename: Xuchu
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Weng
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D001288:Attention / Q000502:physiology*; D003220:Conflict, Psychological; D003463:Cues; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007266:Inhibition, Psychological; D008297:Male; D009949:Orientation / Q000502:physiology*; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D010775:Photic Stimulation; D011597:Psychomotor Performance / Q000502:physiology; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology; D013028:Space Perception / Q000502:physiology*; D057190:Stroop Test
references.citation: Vision Res. 2005 Mar;45(6):765-74
references.pmid: 15639503
references.citation: Braz J Med Biol Res. 1994 Jan;27(1):67-73
references.pmid: 8173531
references.citation: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2003 Sep;58(5):P256-9
references.pmid: 14507931
references.citation: Exp Brain Res. 2008 May;187(3):439-46
references.pmid: 18301884
references.citation: Psychol Res. 2007 Jan;71(1):77-91
references.pmid: 16333663
references.citation: Psychol Res. 1991;53(2):127-35
references.pmid: 1946872
references.citation: Exp Brain Res. 2005 Nov;167(1):27-37
references.pmid: 16021429
references.citation: Curr Opin Neurol. 2007 Aug;20(4):381-6
references.pmid: 17620870
references.citation: Psychol Res. 2001;65(3):185-91
references.pmid: 11571913
references.citation: Psychol Res. 1998;61(2):107-18
references.pmid: 9689907
references.citation: Neuropsychologia. 1988;26(3):435-44
references.pmid: 3374802
references.citation: Acta Psychol (Amst). 2005 Jan-Feb;118(1-2):101-21
references.pmid: 15627412
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2010 Mar;63(3):516-30
references.pmid: 19565432
references.citation: Acta Psychol (Amst). 1992 Oct;81(1):53-74
references.pmid: 1456080
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1997 Oct;23(5):1353-64
references.pmid: 9411021
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2005 Jul;67(5):910-28
references.pmid: 16334062
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2001 Apr;27(2):494-503
references.pmid: 11318063
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1996 Apr;22(2):367-78
references.pmid: 8934850
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2005 Dec;12(6):1061-7
references.pmid: 16615329
references.citation: J Gen Psychol. 1999 Oct;126(4):392-418
references.pmid: 10555867
references.citation: Psychol Res. 2008 Jul;72(4):443-50
references.pmid: 17647015
references.citation: Cogn Process. 2005 Jun;6(2):98-116
references.pmid: 18219508
references.citation: Psychol Res. 1993;55(3):208-22
references.pmid: 8416040
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2004 Nov;8(11):494-500
references.pmid: 15491903
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2000 Apr;4(4):138-147
references.pmid: 10740278
references.citation: Psychol Res. 2003 Nov;67(4):261-5
references.pmid: 14634813
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2001 Dec;27(6):1433-51
references.pmid: 11766935
references.citation: Cogn Psychol. 1992 Apr;24(2):175-219
references.pmid: 1582172
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1997 Nov;59(8):1241-54
references.pmid: 9401458
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2002 Feb;64(2):318-27
references.pmid: 12013383
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 1995 Jun;2(2):174-207
references.pmid: 24203654
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2007 Apr;33(2):348-62
references.pmid: 17469972
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol A. 2001 Aug;54(3):753-73
references.pmid: 11548033
references.citation: Can J Exp Psychol. 2005 Jun;59(2):75-89
references.pmid: 16035342
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1996 Dec;22(6):1505-13
references.pmid: 8953232
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1988 Apr;43(4):346-54
references.pmid: 3362663