Abstract
Subjects used two attentional sets for a reaction time (RT) task in which the information necessary for correct performance was divided between the warning (S1) and the imperative (S2) stimuli. In the general preparation set both right and left forefingers were to be prepared equally for the response. In the specific preparation set either the right or left forefinger was to be primed differentially on the side indicated by S1; thus, S2 matched a subject’s preparation on only 50% of these trials. During half of all the trials a visual distractor was randomly presented. Dependent variables were RT and the contingent negative variation (CNV). Both set and distraction affected RT and the CNV, with larger negative shifts and faster RTs associated with the specific set. While the effect of distraction on performance was reduced under the specific set, the CNV was insensitive to this interaction, attenuating equally to distraction in both sets.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Donchin, E., Kutas, M., & Johnson, R., Jr. The CNV does not behave like a “motor” potential. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 1974, 37, 434.
Loveless, N. E., & Sanford, A. J. Slow potential correlates of preparatory set. Biological Psychology, 1974, 1, 303–314.
Rebert, C. S., & Tecce, J. J. A summary of CNV and reaction time. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 1973, 33, 173–178. (Supplement)
Woodworth, R. S., & Schlosberg, H. Experimental psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1954.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This article is based on the doctoral thesis of the first author. Special thanks to Barbara Henker for her valuable insights during the course of this study as well as to the other committee members, David Shapiro, Joaquin Fuster, and Donald Lindsley. Technical assistance was provided by Perry Jaster; computer programming was done by Carl Figueroa and David Goodman. The research was supported by the Advanced Research Projects Agency of the Department of Defense under Contract N00014- 70-C-0350. Computer processing for data analysis was provided by the Center for Computer-Based Behavioral Studies under Contract F30602-70-00016 with the Advanced Research Projects Agency of the Department of Defense.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kirst, S.P., Beatty, J. Processing strategy and distraction affect reaction time and the CNV. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 12, 71–73 (1978). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03329629
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03329629