Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
W. Neill, K. Terry, Leslie Valdes (1994)
Negative priming without probe selectionPsychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1
E. Buckolz, A. Boulougouris, M. Khan (2002)
The influence of probe-trial selection requirements on the location negative priming effectCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56
G. Houghton, S.P. Tipper (1994)
Inhibitory mechanisms in attention, memory, and language
C. Whitman, E. Geller (1973)
Prediction outcome probabilities as determinants of choice reaction timePerception & Psychophysics, 13
M. Eimer, A. Schubö, F. Schlaghecken (2002)
Locus of Inhibition in the Masked Priming of Response AlternativesJournal of Motor Behavior, 34
S. Tipper (1985)
The Negative Priming Effect: Inhibitory Priming by Ignored ObjectsQuarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37
J. Christie, Raymond Klein (2001)
Negative priming for spatial location?Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale, 55 1
S. Tipper, B. Weaver, Sandra Cameron, Jamie Brehaut, Julie Bastedo (1991)
Inhibitory mechanisms of attention in identification and localization tasks: time course and disruption.Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 17 4
Sarah Guy, E. Buckolz, J. Pratt (2004)
The influence of distractor-only prime trials on the location negative priming mechanism.Experimental psychology, 51 1
F. Valle-Inclán, M. Redondo (1998)
On the automaticity of ipsilateral response activation in the Simon effect.Psychophysiology, 35 4
E. Geller (1975)
Prediction outcome and choice reaction time: Inhibition versus facilitation effectsActa Psychologica, 39
P. Fitts, Charles Seeger (1953)
S-R compatibility: spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes.Journal of experimental psychology, 46 3
S. Tipper (2001)
Does Negative Priming Reflect Inhibitory Mechanisms? A Review and Integration of Conflicting ViewsQuarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54
S. Keele (1969)
Repetition effect: A memory-dependent process.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 80
E. Buckolz, A. Boulougouris, C. O'Donnell, J. Pratt (2002)
Disengaging the negative priming mechanism in location tasksEuropean Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14
E. Buckolz, Adam Goldfarb, Michael Khan (2004)
The use of a distractor-assigned response slows later responding in a location negative priming taskPerception & Psychophysics, 66
R. Jong, Chia-Chin Liang, E. Lauber (1994)
Conditional and unconditional automaticity: a dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence.Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance, 20 4
K. Klauer (2004)
Experimental psychology: journal statistics and trends.Experimental Psychology, 51
E. Buckolz, O. Rugins (1981)
Evidence of response bias facilitation on choice reaction time within a many:1 stimulus-response paradigmJournal of Human Movement Studies, 5
Martin Eimer (1995)
Stimulus-response compatibility and automatic response activation: evidence from psychophysiological studies.Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance, 21 4
Frank Dempster (1995)
Interference and inhibition in cognition: An historical perspective
S. Keele (1973)
Attention and human performance
S. Tipper, Jamie Brehaut, Jon Driver (1990)
Selection of moving and static objects for the control of spatially directed action.Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance, 16 3
B. Milliken, S. Tipper, G. Houghton, J. Lupiáñez (2000)
Attending, ignoring, and repetition: On the relation between negative priming and inhibition of returnPerception & Psychophysics, 62
G. Baylis, S. Tipper, G. Houghton (1997)
Externally cued and internally generated selection : Differences in distractor analysis and inhibitionJournal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23
S.P. Tipper, M. Cranston (1985)
Selective attention and priming: Inhibitory and facilitatory effects of ignore primesQuarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37
W.T. Neill, L.A. Valdes, K.M. Terry (1995)
Interference and Inhibition in Cognition
S. Grison, S. Tipper, Olivia Hewitt (2005)
Long-Term Negative Priming: Support for Retrieval of Prior Attentional ProcessesQuarterly Journal Of Experimental Psychology, 58
G. Houghton, S. Tipper (1994)
A model of inhibitory mechanisms in selective attention.
Sarah Guy, E. Buckolz, Michael Khan (2006)
The locus of location repetition latency effects.Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale, 60 4
E. Buckolz, A. Boulougouris, Michael Khan (2002)
Influence of probe-trial selection on the location negative priming effect.Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale, 56 4
E. Buckolz, Sarah Guy, Michael Khan, Gavin Lawrence (2006)
Can the location negative priming process operate in a proactive manner?Psychological Research, 70
E. Geller (1974)
Preceding prediction outcome and prediction outcome probability: Interacting determinants of choice reaction time.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103
C. Eriksen, M. Coles, L. Morris, William O’hara (1985)
An electromyographic examination of response competitionBulletin of the psychonomic society, 23
W. Neill, Leslie Valdes, K. Terry (1995)
Selective attention and the inhibitory control of cognition.
Responding to the location of a target is slower when it appears at a recent distractor location [ignored-repetition (IR) trial] than when it arises at a new position [control (CO) trial], defining the location negative priming (NP) effect. On IR trials, both the distractor location and response are from the prior trial, and the locus question asks whether the delayed responding that arises is caused by the reused distractor position (i.e., a location locus) or the need to execute a distractor output (i.e., a response locus). A location NP procedure was used, incorporating a many:1 location-to-response mapping design, along with a response cue on some trials. A response locus for the location NP effect was indicated. Distractor-turned-target responses took longer to initiate than new outputs (many:1 paradigm), and valid response cues reduced distractor response interference and the location NP effect. Importantly, a possible S-R compatibility problem within the many:1 S-R paradigm was not supported.
Psychological Research – Springer Journals
Published: Jan 26, 2006
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.