Distractor-response bindings in dual task scenarios

REFERENCES

• Awh, E., & Pashler, H. (2000). Evidence for split attentional foci. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 834–846. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.26.2.834
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edgar, G. K. (2007). Accomodation, cognition, and virtual image displays: A review of the literature. Displays, 28(2), 45–59. doi:10.1016/j.displa.2007.04.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksen, C. W., & St. James, J. D. (1986). Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model. Perception & Psychophysics, 40, 225–240. doi:10.3758/BF03211502
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, E., Haines, R., & Price, T. (1980). Cognitive Issues in Head-up Displays. NASA Technical Paper 1711. Moffet Field, CA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ames Research Center.
   Google Scholar
• Foyle, D. C., McCann, R. S., Sanford, B. D., & Schwirzke, M. F. J. (1993, October). Attentional effects with superimposed symbology: Implications for head-up displays (HUD). Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 37, 1340–1344.
   Google Scholar
• Frings, C., & Moeller, B. (2010). Binding targets’ responses to distractors’ locations: Distractor response bindings in a location priming task. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 2176–2183.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frings, C., & Moeller, B. (2012). The horserace between distractors and targets: Retrieval-based probe responding depends on distractor–target asynchrony. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 24, 582–590. doi:10.1080/20445911.2012.666852
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frings, C., Moeller, B., & Rothermund, K. (2013). Retrieval of event files can be conceptually mediated. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 75, 700–709.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frings, C., & Rothermund, K. (2011). To be, or not to be … included in an event file: When are distractors integrated into S-R episodes and used for response retrieval? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1209–1227.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frings, C., Rothermund, K., & Wentura, D. (2007). Distractor repetitions retrieve previous responses to targets. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 1367–1377. doi:10.1080/17470210600955645
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giesen, C., Frings, C., & Rothermund, K. (2012). Differences in the strength of inhibition do not affect distractor-response bindings. Memory & Cognition, 40, 373–387. doi:10.3758/s13421-011-0157-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giesen, C., & Rothermund, K. (2011). Affective matching moderates S–R binding. Cognition & Emotion, 25, 342–350. doi:10.1080/02699931.2010.482765
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han, S.-H., & Kim, M.-S. (2004). Visual search does not remain efficient when executive working memory is working. Psychological Science, 15, 623–628. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00730.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henson, R. N., Eckstein, D., Waszak, F., Frings, C., & Horner, A. J. (2014). Stimulus-response bindings in priming. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 376–384.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hommel, B. (2005). How much attention does an event file need? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 1067–1082. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.31.5.1067
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hommel, B., Memelink, J., Zmigrod, S., & Colzato, L. S. (2014). Attentional control of the creation and retrieval of stimulus-response bindings. Psychological Research, 78, 520–538.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The Theory of Event Coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 849–878. doi:10.1017/S0140525X01000103
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horrey, W. J., & Wickens, C. D. (2004). Driving and side task performance: The effects of display clutter, separation, and modality. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 46, 611–624. doi:10.1518/hfes.46.4.611.56805
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ihrke, M., Behrendt, J., Schrobsdorff, H., Herrmann, J. M., & Hasselhorn, M. (2011). Response-retrieval and negative priming – Encoding- and retrieval-specific effects. Experimental Psychology, 58, 154–161. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000081
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston, J. C., McCann, R. S., & Remington, R. W. (1995). Chronometric evidence for two types of attention. Psychological Science, 6, 365–369. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00527.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavie, N. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 451–468. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.21.3.451
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, Y.-C. (2003). Effects of using head-up displays in automobile context on attention demand and driving performance. Displays, 24, 157–165. doi:10.1016/j.displa.2004.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492–527. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.95.4.492
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Logan, G. D. (1990). Repetition priming and automaticity: Common underlying mechanisms? Cognitive Psychology, 22(1), 1–35. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(90)90002-L
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin-Emerson, R., & Wickens, C. (1992, October). The vertical visual field and implications for the head-up display. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting, 36, 1408–1412.
   Google Scholar
• McMains, S. A., & Somers, D. C. (2004). Multiple spotlights of attentional selection in human visual cortex. Neuron, 42, 677–686. doi:10.1016/S0896-6273(04)00263-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moeller, B., & Frings, C. (2011). Remember the touch: Tactile distractors retrieve previous responses to targets. Experimental Brain Research, 214(1), 121–130. doi:10.1007/s00221-011-2814-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moeller, B., & Frings, C. (2014a). Attention meets binding: Only attended distractors are used for the retrieval of event files. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76, 959–978.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moeller, B., & Frings, C. (2014b). Designers beware: Response retrieval effects influence drivers’ response times to local danger warnings. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 24, 117–132. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2014.04.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moeller, B., & Frings, C. (2014c). Long term response-stimulus associations can influence distractor-response bindings. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 10(2), 68–80. doi:10.5709/acp-0158-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moeller, B., Rothermund, K., & Frings, C. (2012). Integrating the irrelevant sound – Grouping modulates the integration of auditory distractors into event files. Experimental Psychology, 59, 258–264. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000151
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Most, S. B., Simons, D. J., Scholl, B. J., & Chabris, C. F. (2000). Sustained inattentional blindness: The role of location in the detection of unexpected dynamic events. Psyche, 6(14). Retrieved from http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v6/psyche-6–14-most.html
   Google Scholar
• Most, S. B., Simons, D. J., Scholl, B. J., Jimenez, R., Clifford, E., & Chabris, C. F. (2001). How not to be seen: The contribution of similarity and selective ignoring to sustained inattentional blindness. Psychological Science, 12(1), 9–17. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00303
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller, N., Bartelt, O., Donner, T., Villringer, A., & Brandt, S. (2003). A physiological correlate of the “zoom lens” of visual attention. The Journal of Neuroscience, 23, 3561–3565.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oppitek, E. W. (1973). Head-up displays study (Tech. Rep.). Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH: Air Force Systems Command.
   Google Scholar
• Pashler, H. (1991). Shifting visual attention and selecting motor responses: Distinct attentional mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 1023–1040. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.17.4.1023
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petersen, S. E., & Posner, M. I. (2012). The attention system of the human brain: 20 years after. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 35(1), 73–89. doi:10.1146/annurev-neuro-062111-150525
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 13(1), 25–42. doi:10.1146/annurev.ne.13.030190.000325
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothermund, K., Wentura, D., & De Houwer, J. (2005). Retrieval of incidental stimulus-response associations as a source of negative priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 482–495.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw, M. L., & Shaw, P. (1977). Optimal allocation of cognitive resources to spatial locations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 201–211. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.3.2.201
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sojourner, R. J., & Antin, J. F. (1990). The effects of a simulated head-up display speedometer on perceptual task performance. Human Factors, 32, 329–339.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tukey, J. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Van Dam, W., & Hommel, B. (2010). How object-specific are object files? Evidence for integration by location. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1184–1192. doi:10.1037/a0019955
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waszak, F., Hommel, B., & Allport, A. (2003). Task-switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic stimulus–task bindings in task-shift costs. Cognitive Psychology, 46, 361–413. doi:10.1016/S0010-0285(02)00520-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wickens, C. D., & Long, J. (1995). Object versus space-based models of visual attention: Implications of the design of head-up displays. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1, 179–193. doi:10.1037/1076-898X.1.3.179
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar