Publication Date
In 2025 | 0 |
Since 2024 | 0 |
Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 0 |
Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 0 |
Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 1 |
Descriptor
Cognitive Processes | 4 |
Context Clues | 2 |
Experimental Psychology | 2 |
Eye Fixations | 2 |
Eye Movements | 2 |
Oral Reading | 2 |
Reaction Time | 2 |
Reading Processes | 2 |
Word Recognition | 2 |
Attention | 1 |
Experiments | 1 |
More ▼ |
Source
Journal of Experimental… | 4 |
Author
Anderson, John R. | 1 |
Byrne, Michael D. | 1 |
Lavie, Nilli | 1 |
McClelland, James L. | 1 |
O'Regan, J. K. | 1 |
Rayner, Keith | 1 |
Slowiaczek, Maria L. | 1 |
Taatgen, Niels A. | 1 |
Torralbo, Ana | 1 |
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 4 |
Opinion Papers | 4 |
Education Level
Higher Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
United Kingdom (England) | 1 |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Lavie, Nilli; Torralbo, Ana – Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2010
Load theory of attention proposes that distractor processing is reduced in tasks with high perceptual load that exhaust attentional capacity within task-relevant processing. In contrast, tasks of low perceptual load leave spare capacity that spills over, resulting in the perception of task-irrelevant, potentially distracting stimuli. Tsal and…
Descriptors: Attention, Theories, Perception, Task Analysis
Anderson, John R.; Taatgen, Niels A.; Byrne, Michael D. – Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2005
E. Hazeltine, D. Teague, and R. B. Ivry have presented data that have been interpreted as evidence against a central bottleneck. This article describes simulations of their Experiments 1 and 4 in the ACT-R cognitive architecture, which does possess a central bottleneck in production execution. The simulation model is capable of accounting for the…
Descriptors: Responses, Reaction Time, Simulation, Cognitive Processes

McClelland, James L.; O'Regan, J. K. – Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1981
Rayner and Slowiaczek have a different conception of the issues our experiments address than we do. These differences are discussed. Our main point, is that the extent to which the preview produces a benefit depends on the subject's expectations. (Author/RD)
Descriptors: Cognitive Processes, Context Clues, Eye Fixations, Eye Movements

Rayner, Keith; Slowiaczek, Maria L. – Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1981
McClelland and O'Regan's interpretation of data may not be appropriate. One could argue that subjects used different strategies in the expectation and no-expectation conditions. Second, an inappropriate baseline condition may have been used. Finally their results may not be generalizable to the use of parafoveal vision during reading. (Author/RD)
Descriptors: Cognitive Processes, Context Clues, Eye Fixations, Eye Movements