Chinese Character Processing in Visual Masking.
depth of processing
mask form
masking effect
temporal sequence
visual masking
Journal
Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
Titre abrégé: Front Psychol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101550902
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
24
08
2021
accepted:
27
12
2021
entrez:
14
3
2022
pubmed:
15
3
2022
medline:
15
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
It has not been clarified if attention influences perception of targets in visual masking. Three forms of common masks (random pattern, para-/metacontrast, and four dots) were thus chosen in the present study and presented with character targets in three temporal sequences (forward, backward, and sandwiched mask or forward-backward mask combination). In order to pinpoint the level of processing where masking arises, character targets were varied in depth of processing from random arrangements of strokes up to real Chinese characters. The attentional influence was examined under perceptual discrimination and lexical decision tasks, respectively. The results revealed significant interactions among four factors (mask form, temporal sequence, depth of processing, and task). Identification of character targets in each form of mask sequence varied with task demand, with greater suppression in the perceptual discrimination task. These findings suggested that attentional demand can bias processing in favor of task-related information in visual masking. Variations in masking effects may be contributed by both attentional demand and spatio-temporal interaction.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35283806
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.763705
pmc: PMC8907841
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
763705Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Chen and Zhang.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2016 Jul;78(5):1363-80
pubmed: 27032801
Nat Neurosci. 1998 Jun;1(2):144-9
pubmed: 10195130
Neuron. 2016 Dec 7;92(5):1122-1134
pubmed: 27930903
Percept Psychophys. 1983 Feb;33(2):113-20
pubmed: 6844102
Neuroimage. 2019 Aug 15;197:224-231
pubmed: 31009746
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2014 Sep;34(5):502-8
pubmed: 24697967
J Neurosci. 2019 Jan 9;39(2):353-363
pubmed: 30459223
Neuron. 2005 Jun 2;46(5):811-21
pubmed: 15924866
Adv Cogn Psychol. 2008 Jul 15;3(1-2):153-65
pubmed: 20517505
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2003 Feb;29(1):106-20
pubmed: 12669751
Psychol Res. 1983;45(3):303-13
pubmed: 6665111
J Vis. 2012 Dec 06;12(13):7
pubmed: 23220578
J Cogn Neurosci. 2007 Sep;19(9):1488-97
pubmed: 17714010
Nat Neurosci. 2002 Jul;5(7):629-30
pubmed: 12032544
Psychol Rev. 1997 Jul;104(3):572-94
pubmed: 9243965
Adv Cogn Psychol. 2008 Jul 15;3(1-2):9-20
pubmed: 20517494
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2011 Oct;64(10):1990-2002
pubmed: 21790494
Neuropsychologia. 2020 Aug;145:106535
pubmed: 29037506
Vision Res. 2004 Jun;44(12):1321-31
pubmed: 15066393
Psychol Rev. 1973 Jan;80(1):1-52
pubmed: 4689202
Vision Res. 2006 Sep;46(17):2645-58
pubmed: 16563459
Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1992 Jul;83(1):77-82
pubmed: 1376669
Psychol Sci. 2010 Sep;21(9):1242-7
pubmed: 20696853
Percept Psychophys. 2001 Nov;63(8):1279-92
pubmed: 11800457
PLoS One. 2019 Mar 15;14(3):e0213637
pubmed: 30875416
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2009 Oct;71(7):1576-87
pubmed: 19801617
Vision (Basel). 2019 Feb 10;3(1):
pubmed: 31735809
Cognition. 2007 Jul;104(1):135-49
pubmed: 16859666
Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 1999 Feb;31(1):137-49
pubmed: 10495845
J Vis. 2009 Sep 04;9(10):4.1-9
pubmed: 19810785
Neuroimage. 2019 Mar;188:668-679
pubmed: 30593903
Nature. 1996 Sep 26;383(6598):334-7
pubmed: 8848045
Psychon Bull Rev. 2010 Oct;17(5):737-42
pubmed: 21037175
Adv Cogn Psychol. 2011;7:132-41
pubmed: 22253675
Trends Cogn Sci. 2000 Sep;4(9):345-352
pubmed: 10962616
Hum Brain Mapp. 2022 Mar;43(4):1214-1230
pubmed: 34786780