바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

Article Contents

Prev
e-Submission

Vol.27 No.2

Citation Share

Redundant interference: Evidence for the coactivation model in a word-picture Stroop task

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2015, v.27 no.2, pp.313-319
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2015.27.2.012



& (2015). Redundant interference: Evidence for the coactivation model in a word-picture Stroop task. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 27(2), 313-319, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2015.27.2.012

Abstract

Observers more rapidly detect and more accurately remember two identical targets than a single target, a phenomenon called the redundancy effect. To understand how the visual system deals with redundant information, the current experiment investigated the effect of redundant distractors on target responses. In a word-picture Stroop task, we measured response interference by a single or redundant distractors when the stimulus onset asynchrony varies between a target and the distrator(s). As results, two redundant distractors produced greater Stroop interference than a single distractor although overall response times remained constant. These findings are not compatible with a race model, which assumes separate processing of redundant stimuli, but support a coactivation model, which assumes that redundant stimuli form a single perceptual representation.

keywords
시각적 중복, 단어-사진 스트룹 과제, 공동 활성화 모형, 경주 모형, visual redundancy, word-picture Stroop task, coactivation model, race model

Reference

1.

이지영, 민수정, 이도준 (2011). 스트룹 간섭의 희석 및 중복 효과. 인지과학, 22(4), 469-494.

2.

Barlow, H. B. (1959). Sensory mechanisms, the reduction of redundancy, and intelligence. The mechanisation of thought processes, 10, 535-539.

3.

Brainard, D. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10(4), 433-436.

4.

Eriksen, C. W., Goettl, B., James, J. D. S., & Fournier, L. R. (1989). Processing redundant signals: Coactivation, divided attention, or what? Perception & Psychophysics, 45(4), 356- 370.

5.

Fiedler, A., Schroter, H., & Ulrich, R. (2013). Redundancy gain for semantic features. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(3), 474-480.

6.

Giray, M., & Ulrich, R. (1993). Motor coactivation revealed by response force in divided and focused attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19(6), 1278-1291.

7.

Glaser, W. R., & Dungelhoff, F. J. (1984). The time course of picture-word interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 640-654.

8.

Jiang, Y. V., Kwon, M., Shim, W. M., & Won, B.-Y. (2010). Redundancy effects in the perception and memory of visual objects. Visual Cognition, 18(9), 1233-1252.

9.

Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., & Gibbs, B. J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24(2), 175-219.

10.

Miller, J. (1982). Divided attention: Evidence for coactivation with redundant signals. Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 247-279.

11.

Mordkoff, J. T., & Yantis, S. (1991). An interactive race model of divided attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17(2), 520-538.

12.

Raab, D. H. (1962). Statistical facilitation of simple reaction times. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences, 24, 574-590.

13.

Ulrich, R., Miller, J., & Schroter, H. (2007). Testing the race model inequality: an algorithm and computer programs. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 291-302.

14.

Won, B. Y., & Jiang, Y. V. (2013). Redundancy effects in the processing of emotional faces. Vision Research, 78, 6-13.

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy