臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究探討注意力作用機制中的導向 (orienting) 與選擇 (selection) 之間的關係。注意力導向分為外引式 (exogenous) 和內發性 (endogenous) 兩種，而注意力選擇也分為空間為基 (space-based) 與物體為基 (object-based) 兩種。本研究旨在探討內發性注意力導向是否為物體為基選擇的必要和充分條件。本研究採用 Egly、Driver、與Rafal (1994) 的提示作業典範，因其具備下列兩項優點：可同時操弄「外引式」和「內發性」兩種注意力導向，並可同時到空間效果與物體效果，二者分別為注意力選擇是以「空間為基」和「物體為基」的指標。實驗一重複Egly等人 (1994)的實驗以作為後續實驗的比較基準。在實驗一中，同時有外引式與內發式的注意力導向，並同時觀察到空間效果和物體效果。實驗二使用沒有訊息量的線索使內發性注意力導向無法作用在物體，而只有外引式注意力導向，結果只觀察到空間效果。故內發性注意力導向是物體為基選擇的必要條件。此外，觀察到空間上的回向抑制 (inhibition of return)，這是以Egly等人的作業所未曾發現過的。實驗三採用與實驗一同樣有訊息的線索但讓物體在提示出現之後、目標出現之前消失，以進一步探討內發性注意力導向是否為物體為基選擇的充分條件。結果無法得到物體效果，顯示內發性注意力導向並非充分條件。綜合三個實驗可得知，內發性注意力導向是物體為基選擇的必要但非充要條件。欲閃生物體為基的選擇，至少還需物體的持續呈現。

In this study, we investigated the relationship between orienting (exogenous vs. endogenous) and selection (space-based vs. object-based) in attention mechanisms.　　Specifically, we examined whether endogenous orienting is the necessary and sufficient condition for object-based selection.　The cueing paradigm of Egly, Driver, and Rafal (1994) was adopted because the location effect and the object effect, which are indicative of space-based and object-based selection, can be observed in the same task.　Moreover, with the manipulation of cue validity, exogenous and endogenous orienting could be induced alone or simultaneously in this paradigm.　In Experiment 1, we replicated the results of Egly et al. (1994) which used informative peripheral cues, showing that both location and object effects were obtained.　In Experiment 2, uninformative peripheral cue was applied to induce pure exogenous orienting and only an inhibition of return on the cued location which has not been found in previous studies using the Egly et al.’s paradigm.　It is inferred that endogenous orienting is necessary for the object-based selection.　Experiment 3 used the same cue as in Experiment 1 but the object disappeared after the cue display.　No object effect was obtained when the object disappeared for 200 or 80 ms.　Therefore, endogenous orienting is not a sufficient condition for the object effect.　We conclude that endogenous orienting is necessary but not sufficient for the object effect.

Table of Content
摘要..........................................5
ABSTRACT..........................................6
INTRODUCTION.......................................... 7
Exogenous Orienting vs. Endogenous Orienting..........................................7
Space-Based Selection..........................................10
Object-Based Selection..........................................13
The Paradigm of Egly, Driver, and Rafal (1994)..........................................15
Orienting and Selection..........................................16
The Cue Used and the Orienting Induced..........................................19
The Effect of Object Presentation on the Object Effect..........................................22
Goal of this Study ..........................................24
EXPERIMENT 1..........................................25
Methods..........................................25
Results..........................................28
Discussion..........................................29
EXPERIMENT 2..........................................31
Methods..........................................31
Results..........................................33
Discussion..........................................34
EXPERIMENT 3A..........................................37
Methods..........................................38
Results..........................................38
Discussion..........................................39
EXPERIMENT 3B..........................................40
Methods..........................................40
Results..........................................41
Discussion..........................................41
GENERAL DISCUSSION..........................................44
The Necessary Condition for the Object Effect..........................................44
The Location effect and IOR..........................................46
The Difference between the Two Types of Orienting on Selection..........................................49
The Mechanisms of the Object Effect..........................................51
Top-Down Factors and Endogenous Orienting..........................................55
The Possible Mechanism of IOR..........................................56
Conclusion..........................................58
REFERENCES..........................................60
Figures and Tables
Figure 1: Illustrations for the cue conditions in Egly et al. (1994)............................. 66
Figure 2: The procedure used in Experiment 1 and Egly et al. (1994)....................... 67
Figure 3: Results of Experiment 1.............................................................................. 68
Figure 4: The procedure of Experiment 2................................................................... 69
Figure 5: Results of Experiment 2........................................................................ 70, 71
Figure 6: The procedure of Experiments 3A and 3B.................................................. 72
Figure 7: Results of Experiment 3A........................................................................... 73
Figure 8: The Ternus display....................................................................................... 74
Figure 9: Results of Experiment 3B............................................................................ 75
Table 1: Comparison of two studies that used a paradigm similar to Egly et al. (1994) ......................................................................................................................... 76
Table 2: Summary of results....................................................................................... 77
Table 3: Three hypotheses for the mechanism of the object effect and their predictions in this study.................................................................................................. 78

Abrams, R. A., & Law, M. B. (2000). Object-based visual attention with endogenous orienting. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 818-833.
Bavelier, D. (1999). Role and nature of object representations in perceiving and acting. In Coltheart, V. (Ed.), Fleeting Memories: Cognition of Brief Visual Stimuli (pp. 151-180). MIT Press.
Bavelier, D. (1992). Phonological repetition blindness. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Berlucchi, G., Chelazzi, L., & Tassinari, G. (2000). Volitional covert orienting to a peripheral cue does not suppress cue-induced inhibition of return. Journal of cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 648-663.
Brawn, P. T. & Snowden, R. J. (2000). Attention to Overlapping Objects: Detection and Discrimination of Luminance Changes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 342-358.
Briand, K. A., & Klein, R. M. (1987). Is Posner’s “Beam” the same as Treisman’s “glue” On the relation between visual orienting and feature integration theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 13, 228-241.
Carrasco, M., Penpeci-Talgar, C., & Eckstein, M. (2000). Spatial covert attention increases contrast sensitivity across the CSF: support for signal enhancement. Vision Research, 40, 1203-1215.
Chaudhuri, A. (1990). Modulation of the motion aftereffect by selective attention. Nature, 344, 60-62.
Chen, H. C. & Cheng, C. M. (1999). ANOVA and trend analysis statistical program for cognitive experiment. Research in Applied Psychology, 1, 229-246.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral science (2nd ed. pp. 180-183). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
Danziger, S., & Kingstone, A. (1999). Unmasking the inhibition of return phenomenon. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 1024-1037.
Duncan, J. (1984). Selective attention and the organization of visual information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 501-517.
Egly, R., Driver, J., & Rafal, R. D. (1994). Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: Evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 161-177.
Egly, R., & Homa, D. (1984). Sensitization of the visual field. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 10, 778-793.
Eriksen, C. W., & Yeh, Y. (1985). Allocation of attention in the visual field. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 11, 583-597.
Jonides, J. (1981). Voluntary versus automatic control over the mind’s eye. In J. Long & A. Baddeley (Eds.), Attention and performance IX (pp. 187-203). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Jordan, H., & Tipper, S. P. (1999). Spread of inhibition of across an object’s surface. British Journal of Psychology, 90, 495-507.
Kanwisher, N. G. (1986). Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token individuation. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Kanwisher, N. G. (1987). Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token individuation. Cognition, 27, 117-143.
Kahneman, D., Treisman, A. M., & Gibbs, B. J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 175-219.
Klein, R., & McCormick, P. (1989). Covert visual orienting: hemifield-activation can be mimicked by zoom lens and midlocation placement strategies. Acta Psychologica, 70, 235-250.
LaBerge, D., & Brown, V. (1989). Theory of attentional operations in shape identification. Psychological Review, 96, 101-124.
Lamy, D., & Egeth, H. (2002). Object-based selection: the role of attentional shifts. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 52-66.
Lamy, D., & Tsal, Y. (2000). Object features, Object Locations, and Object Files: Which Does Selective Attention Activate and When? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 1387-1400.
Mapelli, D., Cherubini, P., & Umiltà, C. (2002). Attending to objects: costs or benefits? Acta Psychologica, 109, 57-74.
Macquistan, A. D. (1997). Object-based allocation of visual attention in response to exogenous, but not endogenous, spatial precues. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4. 512-515.
Maylor E. A. (1985). Facilitatory and inhibitory components of orienting in visual space. In M. I. Posner & O. S. M. Marin (Eds.), Attention and performance XI (pp. 189-204). Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
Maylor E. A. & Hockey R. (1985). Inhibitory component of externally controlled covert orienting in visual space. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 11, 777-787
Moran, J., & Desimone, R. (1985). Selective attention gates visual processing in the extrastriate cortex. Science, 229, 782-784.
Müller, H. J., & Findlay, J. M. (1987). Sensitivity and criterion effects in the spatial cuing of visual attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 42, 383-399.
Müller, H. J., & Rabbitt, P. M. (1989). Reflexive and voluntary orienting of visual attention: time course of activation and resistance to interruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 15, 315-330.
Pantle, A.J., & Petersik, J.T. (1980). Effects of spatial parameters on the perceptual organization of a bistable motion display. Perception & Psychophysics, 27, 307-312.
Petersik, J.T., & Pantle, A.J. (1979). Factors controlling the competing sensations produced by a bistable stroboscopic motion display. Vision Research, 19, 143-154.
Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 3-25.
Posner, M. I., Snyder, C. R., & Davidson, B. J. (1980). Attention and the detection of signals. Journal of Experimental Physiology, 109, 160-174.
Posner, M. I., & Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bowhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X: Control of language processes (pp. 531-556). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Posner, M. I., Rafal, R. D., Choate, L., & Vaughan, J. (1985). Inhibition of return: Neural basis and function. Cognitive Neruopsychology, 2, 211-228.
Pratt, J., & Fischer, M. H. (2002). Examining the role of the fixation cue in inhibition of return. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56, 294-301.
Rafal, Calabresi, Brennan, & Sciolto (1989). Saccade preparation inhibits reorienting to recently attended locations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 15, 673-685.
Riggio, L., & Kirsner, K. (1997). The relationship between central cues and peripheral cues in covert visual orientation. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 885-899.
Schendel, K. L., Robertson, L. C., & Treisman, A. (2001). Objects and their locations in exogenous cuing. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 577-594.
Shepard, R.N., & Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171, 701-703.
Shomstein, S., & Yantis, S. (2002). Object-based attention: Sensory modulation or priority setting? Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 41-51.
Shulman, G.. L., Remington, R. W., McLean, J. P. (1979). Moving attention through visual space. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 5, 552-556.
Shyi, G.. C. W., & Chen, S. W. (1993). The size of attentional focus and attentional movement in the visual space. Chinese Journal of Psychology, 35, 127-146.
Steinman, B. A., Steinman, S. B., & Lehmkuhle, S. (1995). Visual attention mechanisms show a center-surround organization. Vision Research, 35, 1859-1869.
Tipper, S. P., Weaver, B., Jerreat, L. M., & Burak, A. L. (1994). Object-based and environment-based inhibition of return of visual attention. Journal of experimental psychology: human perception and performance, 20, 478-499.
Tsal, Y. (1983). Movements of attention across the visual field. Journal of experimental psychology: human perception and performance, 9, 523-530.
Vecera, S. P., & Farah, M. J. (1994). Does Visual Attention Select Objects or Locations? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 123, 146-160
Valdes-Sosa, M., Cobo, A., & Pinilla, T. (2000). Attention to object files defined by transparent motion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 488-505.
Watson, D. G., & Humphreys, G. W. (1997). Visual marking: prioritizing selection for new objects by top-down attentional inhibition of old objects. Psychological Review, 104, 90-122.
Yantis, S., & Gibson, B. S. (1994). Object continuity in apparent motion and attention. Canadian Journal Experimental Psychology, 48, 182-204.
Yantis, S., & Hillstrom, A. P. (1994). Stimulus-driven attentional capture: evidence from equiluminant visual object. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 95-107.
Yeh, S. L., Chen, I. P., De Valois, K. K. , & De Valois, R. L. (1996). Figural aftereffects and spatial attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, 446-460.
Yeshurun, Y. & Carrasco, M. (1998). Attention improves or impairs visual performance by enhancing spatial resolution. Nature, 396, 72-75.