Content Memory (Learning Ability) As Comprehension 82 Vocabulary Cs .30 ( ) .23 .31 ( ) .31 .31 .35 ( ) .29 .48 .35 .38 ( ) .30 .40 .47 .58 .48 ( ) As judged against these latter values, comprehension (.48) and vocabulary (.47), but not memory (.31), show some specific validity. This transmutability of the validation matrix argues for the comparisons within the heteromethod block as the most generally relevant validation data, and illustrates the potential interchangeability of trait and method components. Some of the correlations in Chi's (1937) prodigious study of halo effect in ratings are appropriate to a multitrait-multimethod matrix in which each rater might be regarded as representing a different method. While the published report does not make these available in detail because it employs averaged values, it is apparent from a comparison of his Tables IV and VIII that the ratings generally failed to meet the requirement that ratings of the same trait by different raters should correlate higher than ratings of different traits by the same rater. Validity is shown to the extent that of the correlations in the heteromethod block, those in the validity diagonal are higher than the average heteromethod-heterotrait values. A conspicuously unsuccessful multitrait-multimethod matrix is provided by Campbell (1953, 1956) for rating of the leadership behavior of officers by themselves and by their subordinates. Only one of 11 variables (Recognition Behavior) met the requirement of providing a validity diagonal value higher than any of the heterotrait-heteromethod values, that validity being .29. For none of the variables were the validities higher than heterotrait-monomethod values. A study of attitudes toward authority and nonauthority figures by Burwen and Campbell (1957) contains a complex multitrait-multimethod matrix, one symmetrical excerpt from which is shown in Table 6. Method variance was strong for most of the procedures in this study. Where validity was found, it was primarily at the level of validity diagonal values higher than heterotrait-heteromethod values. As illustrated in Table 6, attitude toward father showed this kind of validity, as did attitude toward peers to a lesser degree. Attitude toward boss showed no validity. There was no evidence of a generalized attitude toward authority which would include father and boss, although such values as the VALIDATION BY THE MULTITRAIT-MULTIMETHOD MATRIX

Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.

We review evidence for partially segregated networks of brain areas that carry out different attentional functions. One system, which includes parts of the intraparietal cortex and superior frontal cortex, is involved in preparing and applying goal-directed (top-down) selection for stimuli and responses. This system is also modulated by the detection of stimuli. The other system, which includes the temporoparietal cortex and inferior frontal cortex, and is largely lateralized to the right hemisphere, is not involved in top-down selection. Instead, this system is specialized for the detection of behaviourally relevant stimuli, particularly when they are salient or unexpected. This ventral frontoparietal network works as a 'circuit breaker' for the dorsal system, directing attention to salient events. Both attentional systems interact during normal vision, and both are disrupted in unilateral spatial neglect.

Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain

http://www.cse.psu.edu/~rtc12/CSE597E/papers/treismanFeatIntegration.pdf

A feature-integration theory of attention

Evidence is reviewed which suggests that there may be little or no direct introspective access to higher order cognitive processes. Subjects are sometimes (a) unaware of the existence of a stimulus that importantly influenced a response, (b) unaware of the existence of the response, and (c) unaware that the stimulus has affected the response. It is proposed that when people attempt to report on their cognitive processes, that is, on the processes mediating the effects of a stimulus on a response, they do not do so on the basis of any true introspection. Instead, their reports are based on a priori, implicit causal theories, or judgments about the extent to which a particular stimulus is a plausible cause of a given response. This suggests that though people may not be able to observe directly their cognitive processes, they will sometimes be able to report accurately about them. Accurate reports will occur when influential stimuli are salient and are plausible causes of the responses they produce, and will not occur when stimuli are not salient or are not plausible causes.

/pdf/telling-more-than-we-can-know-verbal-reports-on-mental-57xv5dwuck.pdf

Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.

Bartlett viewed thinking as a high level skill exhibiting ballistic properties that he called its “point of no return”. This paper explores one aspect of cognition through the use of a simple model...

/pdf/orienting-of-attention-2bi7r8jak3.pdf

Orienting of attention

During a 1-sec tachistoscopic exposure, Ss responded with a right or left leverpress to a single target letter from the sets H and K or S and C. The target always appeared directly above the fixation cross. Experimentally varied were the types of noise letters (response compatible or incompatible) flanking the target and the spacing between the letters in the display. In all noise conditions, reaction time (RT) decreased as between-letter spacing increased. However, noise letters of the opposite response set were found to impair RT significantly more than same response set noise, while mixed noise letters belonging to neither set but having set-related features produced intermediate impairment. Differences between two target-alone control conditions, one presented intermixed with noise-condition trials and one presented separately in blocks, gave evidence of a preparatory set on the part of Ss to inhibit responses to the noise letters. It was concluded that S cannot prevent processing of noise letters occurring within about 1 deg of the target due to the nature of processing channel capacity and must inhibit his response until he is able to discriminate exactly which letter is in the target position. This discrimination is more difficult and time consuming at closer spacings, and inhibition is more difficult when noise letters indicate the opposite response from the targe

/pdf/effects-of-noise-letters-upon-the-identification-of-a-target-28q1rguggb.pdf

Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task

The operation of attention in the visual field has often been compared to a spotlight. We propose that a more apt analogy is that of a zoom or variable-power lens. Two experiments focused upon the following questions: (1) Can the spatial extent of the attentional focus be made to vary in response to precues? (2) As the area of the attentional focus increases, is there a decrease in processing efficiency for stimuli within the focus? (3) Is the boundary of the focus sharply demarked from the residual field, or does it show a gradual dropoff in processing resources? Subjects were required to search eight-letter circular displays for one of two target letters and reaction times were recorded. One to four adjacent display positions were precued by underlines at various stimulus onset asynchronies before display presentation. A response competition paradigm was used, in which the “other target” was used as a noise letter in noncued as well as cued locations. The results were in good agreement with the zoom lens model.

/pdf/visual-attention-within-and-around-the-field-of-focal-o42m11hvve.pdf

Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model

This paper reexamines the visual search process, and visual information processing more generally, from a perspective of the continuous flow of information and responses through the visual system. The results from three experiments are reported which support the continuous flow conception: Information accumulates gradually in the visual system, with concurrent priming of responses. The first two experiments investigated the processing of display stimuli which varied in size and figure-ground contrast in a nonsearch task, and provided evidence confirming a continuous flow model. Experiment 3 employed an asynchronous onset of target and noise and provided convergent evidence of the accumulative nature of information and response priming in visual processing.

/pdf/information-processing-in-visual-search-a-continuous-flow-7jdzd9bh9b.pdf

Information processing in visual search: a continuous flow conception and experimental results.

To examine mechanisms of response activation, we asked subjects to respond differentially to the central letter of one of four arrays--HHHHH, SSHSS, SSSSS, and HHSHH--and measured event-related brain potentials (ERPs) and electromyographic activity (EMG). For very fast responses, accuracy was at chance level for all arrays, suggesting that subjects were guessing. For intermediate latency responses, accuracy was above chance if the noise was compatible with the targets and below chance if it was incompatible, suggesting that these responses were based on partial stimulus analysis. For slow responses, accuracy was above chance for all arrays, suggesting that these responses were based on complete stimulus analysis. The occurrence and accuracy of fast responses could be predicted by examining motor potentials preceding the presentation of the array. Measures of the motor potentials in the period following the presentation of the array suggested that partial analysis of stimulus information could activate responses and that the level of response activation at the time of the EMG response was constant for trials with different response latencies. The data are discussed in terms of a response channel conception.

Pre- and poststimulus activation of response channels: a psychophysiological analysis

Discrimination and learning without awareness: a methodological survey and evaluation.

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Charles W. Eriksen

Author Tools

Chat about Author