Citation

Wolford G, Marchak F, Hughes H. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 1988; 14(1): 101-112.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1988, American Psychological Association)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

2964500

Abstract

In two experiments we demonstrate that much larger practice effects occur in a backward masking paradigm where patterned masks are used than in similar visual processing paradigms, such as lateral masking and whole report. In additional experiments we examine four possible explanations for the large practice effects: increased familiarity with the paradigm in general, learning about the targets, learning about the masks, and enhanced sensory processing. Because of failure to observe similar practice effects in related paradigms not involving backward masking and because of the sustained nature of the improvement, we reject the first explanation as a source of practice effect. Experiment 3 allowed us to reject target learning as a source of improvement as well; target sets were switched at the end of training, but no decrement in performance was observed. In Experiment 4, mask sets were switched at the end of training, revealing a significant decrement in performance. Learning about the specific masks, then, does contribute to the observed improvement. However, it is responsible for only about one third of the overall improvement in performance. The final experiment provides evidence that the residual improvement is due to enhanced sensory processing. In that experiment, training on backward masking led to a lowered threshold in a two-flash paradigm but not to a significant change in whole-report performance.

Language: en