Abstract
Smith, Haviland, Reder, Brownell, and Adams (1976) found tachistoscopic letter recognition to be disrupted by advance information about possible letter alternatives. An association of “before-disruption” with a bias to respond “same” in same-different judgment led Smith et al. to conclude that incidental mask features corresponding to a precued letter were erroneously incorporated into the target letter decision. Experiments 1 and 2 in the present study failed to replicate the before-disruption effect under conditions similar to those of Smith et al., although precuing produced a strong bias to respond “same.” Similarity between “same” and “different” alternatives was manipulated in Experiment 3 by selecting letter pairs differing in one critical feature (P-R, O-Q, C-G, F-E) for one group of subjects, and re-pairing the same letters (P-G, O-E, C-R, F-Q) for another group. Contrary to Smith et el., precuing interacted significantly with pair similarity, such that before-disruption occurred only with similar alternatives. In contrast, precuing produced equivalent “same-bias” in both groups. The dependence of before-disruption on pair similarity was extended to two-alternative forced-choice recognition in Experiment 4. Together with inconsistencies in the Smith et al. data and more detailed analysis of present recognition errors, the results suggest (1) the before-disruption and same-bias effects of precuing are mediated by separate mechanisms, and (2) before-disruption reflects loss of target letter information rather than direct incorporation of extraneous mask features.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Reference note
Neill, W. T.Disruptive effects of prior information on tachistoscopic recognition? Paper presented at the meeting of the Southeastern Psychological Association, New Orleans, March 1979.
References
Bouma, H. Visual recognition of isolated lower-case letters.Vision Research, 1971,11, 459–474.
Broadbent, D. E.Decision and stress. New York: Academic Press, 1971.
Egan, J. P.Signal detection theory and ROC analysis. New York: Academic Press, 1975.
Egeth, H. E., &Smith, E. E. Perceptual selectivity in a visual recognition task.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967,74, 534–549.
Green, D. M., &Swets, J. A.Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley, 1966.
Gummerman, K. Selective perception and the number of alternatives.American Journal of Psychology, 1971,84, 173–179.
Haber, R. N. Nature of the effect of set on perception.Psychological Review, 1966,73, 335–351.
Hawkins, H. L., Reicher, G. M., Rogers, M., &Peterson, L. Flexible coding in word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1976,2, 380–385.
Laberge, D., Peterson, R. J., &Norden, M. J. Exploring the limits of cuing. In S. Dornic (Ed.),Attention and performance VL. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1977.
Long, E. R., Reid, L. S., &Henneman, R. H. An experimental analysis of set: Variables influencing the identification of ambiguous stimulus-objects.American Journal of Psychology, 1960,73, 553–562.
McClelland, J. Preliminary letter identification in the perception of words and nonwords.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1976,2, 80–91.
Mezrich, J. J. The word familiarity effect in brief displays: Elimination by vocalization.Perception & Psychophysics, 1973,13, 45–48.
Morton, J. Interaction of information in word recognition.Psychological Review, 1969,76, 165–178.
Posner, M. I. Abstraction and the process of recognition. In G. Bower & J. T. Spence (Eds.),Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 3). New York: Academic Press, 1969.
Posner, M. I.Chronometric explorations of mind. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1978.
Posner, M. I., &Snyder, C. R. R. Facilitation and inhibition in the processing of signals. In P. M. A. Rabbitt & S. Dornic (Eds.),Attention and performance V. New York: Academic Press, 1975.
Reicher, G.M. Perceptual recognition as a function of meaning-fulness of stimulus material.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969,81, 275–280.
Smith, E. E., Haviland, S. E., Reder, L. M., Brownell, H., &Adams, N. When preparation fails: Disruptive effects of prior information on perceptual recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1976,2, 151–161.
Smith, E. E., &Spoehr, K. T. The perception of printed English: A theoretical perspective. In B. H. Kantowitz (Ed.),Human information processing: Tutorials in performance and cognition. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1974.
Thompson, M. C., &Massaro, D. W. Visual information and redundancy in reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1973,98, 49–54.
Townsend, J. T. Theoretical analysis of an alphabetic confusion matrix.Perception & Psychophysics, 1971,9, 40–50.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Neill, W.T., Walling, J.R. Disruptive effects of prior information on tachistoscopic recognition. Mem Cogn 9, 217–224 (1981). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202337
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202337