Citation

Pratt J, Radulescu P, Guo RM, Hommel B. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 2010; 36(5): 1321-1324.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2010, American Psychological Association)

DOI

10.1037/a0019996

PMID

20873941

Abstract

There is considerable evidence that overlearned symbols, especially arrows, can orient attention to peripheral locations. In 2003, Pratt and Hommel showed that when 1 arrow is selected from a set of arrows, based on an attentional control setting for a specific target color, the selected arrow determines the orientation of attention. Recently, Leblanc and Jolicoeur (2010) reexamined this finding, and concluded that spatial proximity of the arrow to the target, not the symbolic value of the arrow, determines the orienting of attention. Here, we manipulated both the symbolic value of the cue (direction arrows or directionless circles) and the proximity of the cue to the peripheral target location (near or far), and found that although proximity does play a role in the orienting of attention (larger cuing effects were found with far cues than near cues), the symbolic content of the cue also plays an important role (larger cuing effects were found with arrows than circles). Thus, both the symbolic value and the spatial proximity of cues affect the orienting of attention. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved).

Language: en