Transient covert attention does alter appearance: A reply to Schneider (2006)

Sam Ling, Marisa Carrasco-Queijeiro

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

We recently demonstrated that transient covert attention increases the apparent contrast of a stimulus (Carrasco, Ling, & Read, 2004). Schneider (2006) proposes that the observed increase in apparent contrast is largely due to sensory interactions occurring between the precue and stimulus, rather than to attention. Specifically, he reports that cuing effects only occur at contrasts near detection threshold, and that there are confounding sensory interactions between the cue and stimulus at suprathreshold detection contrasts. Our response is twofold. First, we outline the key methodological differences between our original study and Schneider's that are likely to account for the different results, and explain how we had ruled out the sensory interaction explanation of the cue. Second, we directly test the prediction put forth by Schneider: If the effects were due to sensory interactions, reversing the luminance polarity of the precue in our paradigm should lead to differential cuing effects. We replicate one of the experiments of our original study and add a condition in which the cue luminance is either black or white. Our results replicated our previous findings-they showed an increase in apparent contrast to a high-contrast stimulus when it was precued. Moreover, we found that the black cue and the white cue had the same effect, thus ruling out the alternative explanation proposed by Schneider. Transient attention does alter contrast appearance.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1051-1058
Number of pages8
JournalPerception & Psychophysics
Volume69
Issue number6
StatePublished - Aug 2007

Fingerprint

Cues
stimulus
interaction
Sensory Thresholds
paradigm
Stimulus
Interaction
experiment
hydroquinone

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Cite this

Transient covert attention does alter appearance : A reply to Schneider (2006). / Ling, Sam; Carrasco-Queijeiro, Marisa.

In: Perception & Psychophysics, Vol. 69, No. 6, 08.2007, p. 1051-1058.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ling, S & Carrasco-Queijeiro, M 2007, 'Transient covert attention does alter appearance: A reply to Schneider (2006)', Perception & Psychophysics, vol. 69, no. 6, pp. 1051-1058.
Ling, Sam ; Carrasco-Queijeiro, Marisa. / Transient covert attention does alter appearance : A reply to Schneider (2006). In: Perception & Psychophysics. 2007 ; Vol. 69, No. 6. pp. 1051-1058.
@article{0f7950a481f24680b40661052d4235bf,
title = "Transient covert attention does alter appearance: A reply to Schneider (2006)",
abstract = "We recently demonstrated that transient covert attention increases the apparent contrast of a stimulus (Carrasco, Ling, & Read, 2004). Schneider (2006) proposes that the observed increase in apparent contrast is largely due to sensory interactions occurring between the precue and stimulus, rather than to attention. Specifically, he reports that cuing effects only occur at contrasts near detection threshold, and that there are confounding sensory interactions between the cue and stimulus at suprathreshold detection contrasts. Our response is twofold. First, we outline the key methodological differences between our original study and Schneider's that are likely to account for the different results, and explain how we had ruled out the sensory interaction explanation of the cue. Second, we directly test the prediction put forth by Schneider: If the effects were due to sensory interactions, reversing the luminance polarity of the precue in our paradigm should lead to differential cuing effects. We replicate one of the experiments of our original study and add a condition in which the cue luminance is either black or white. Our results replicated our previous findings-they showed an increase in apparent contrast to a high-contrast stimulus when it was precued. Moreover, we found that the black cue and the white cue had the same effect, thus ruling out the alternative explanation proposed by Schneider. Transient attention does alter contrast appearance.",
author = "Sam Ling and Marisa Carrasco-Queijeiro",
year = "2007",
month = "8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "69",
pages = "1051--1058",
journal = "Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics",
issn = "1943-3921",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Transient covert attention does alter appearance

T2 - A reply to Schneider (2006)

AU - Ling, Sam

AU - Carrasco-Queijeiro, Marisa

PY - 2007/8

Y1 - 2007/8

N2 - We recently demonstrated that transient covert attention increases the apparent contrast of a stimulus (Carrasco, Ling, & Read, 2004). Schneider (2006) proposes that the observed increase in apparent contrast is largely due to sensory interactions occurring between the precue and stimulus, rather than to attention. Specifically, he reports that cuing effects only occur at contrasts near detection threshold, and that there are confounding sensory interactions between the cue and stimulus at suprathreshold detection contrasts. Our response is twofold. First, we outline the key methodological differences between our original study and Schneider's that are likely to account for the different results, and explain how we had ruled out the sensory interaction explanation of the cue. Second, we directly test the prediction put forth by Schneider: If the effects were due to sensory interactions, reversing the luminance polarity of the precue in our paradigm should lead to differential cuing effects. We replicate one of the experiments of our original study and add a condition in which the cue luminance is either black or white. Our results replicated our previous findings-they showed an increase in apparent contrast to a high-contrast stimulus when it was precued. Moreover, we found that the black cue and the white cue had the same effect, thus ruling out the alternative explanation proposed by Schneider. Transient attention does alter contrast appearance.

AB - We recently demonstrated that transient covert attention increases the apparent contrast of a stimulus (Carrasco, Ling, & Read, 2004). Schneider (2006) proposes that the observed increase in apparent contrast is largely due to sensory interactions occurring between the precue and stimulus, rather than to attention. Specifically, he reports that cuing effects only occur at contrasts near detection threshold, and that there are confounding sensory interactions between the cue and stimulus at suprathreshold detection contrasts. Our response is twofold. First, we outline the key methodological differences between our original study and Schneider's that are likely to account for the different results, and explain how we had ruled out the sensory interaction explanation of the cue. Second, we directly test the prediction put forth by Schneider: If the effects were due to sensory interactions, reversing the luminance polarity of the precue in our paradigm should lead to differential cuing effects. We replicate one of the experiments of our original study and add a condition in which the cue luminance is either black or white. Our results replicated our previous findings-they showed an increase in apparent contrast to a high-contrast stimulus when it was precued. Moreover, we found that the black cue and the white cue had the same effect, thus ruling out the alternative explanation proposed by Schneider. Transient attention does alter contrast appearance.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=35649022654&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=35649022654&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 18018987

AN - SCOPUS:35649022654

VL - 69

SP - 1051

EP - 1058

JO - Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

JF - Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

SN - 1943-3921

IS - 6

ER -