Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
JP Townsend (1974)
Human information processing: Tutorials in performance and cognition
FC Donders (1969)
Attention and performance II
AHC Heijden (1981)
Short-term visual information forgetting
W. Schneider, R. Shiffrin (1977)
Controlled and Automatic Human Information Processing: 1. Detection, Search, and Attention.Psychological Review
W. Estes (1978)
PERCEPTUAL PROCESSING IN LETTER RECOGNITION AND READING
R. Nickerson (1972)
Binary-classification reaction time: A review of some studies of human information-processing capabilities.
Richard Atkinson, J. Holmgren, J. Juola (1969)
Processing time as influenced by the number of elements in a visual displayPerception & Psychophysics, 6
D. Norman (1968)
Toward a theory of memory and attention.Psychological Review, 75
H. Egeth, Janette Atkinsons, G. Gilmore, Norman Marcus (1973)
Factors affecting processing mode in visual searchPerception & Psychophysics, 13
C. Eriksen, Derek Schultz (1979)
Information processing in visual search: A continuous flow conception and experimental resultsPerception & Psychophysics, 25
H. Egeth, J. Jonides, S. Wall (1972)
Parallel processing of multielement displaysCognitive Psychology, 3
B. Eriksen, C. Eriksen (1974)
Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch taskPerception & Psychophysics, 16
J. Holmgren (1974)
Visual search in a forced-choice paradigmPerception & Psychophysics, 16
F. Donders (1969)
On the speed of mental processes.Acta psychologica, 30
R. Shiffrin, W. Schneider (1977)
Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory.Psychological Review, 84
H. Gleitman, J. Jonides (1976)
The cost of categorization in visual search: Incomplete processing of targets and field itemsPerception & Psychophysics, 20
David Taylor (1976)
Processing of repeated letters in search and matching tasksPerception & Psychophysics, 19
WK Estes (1978)
Handbook of perception, Vol IX
In research on visual search within a single eye-fixation a number of different tasks are used and referred to interchangeably. Research with other types of tasks suggests that there are possibly important differences between these tasks. In the present study, two types of search tasks were compared under conditions as equal as possible: the ‘go-no go’ task and the ‘yes-no’ task. Conditions of low and high target-noise similarity were used. The results obtained showed: a) a steeper slope of the array size function in ‘yes-no’ tasks than in ‘go-no go’ tasks on the first day of practice but not on the second: b) a higher intercept value of the same function for ‘yes-no’ tasks than for ‘go-no go’ tasks; and c) a greater proportion of errors with ‘yes-no’ tasks than with comparable ‘go-no go’ tasks. A tentative model, describing the main features of the results obtained, is briefly sketched.
Psychological Research – Springer Journals
Published: Dec 1, 1982
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.