Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
| Autor/inn/en | Dhooge, Elisah; Hartsuiker, Robert J. |
|---|---|
| Titel | Distractor Exclusion Is Not an Early Process: A Reply to Roelofs, Piai, and Schriefers (2011) |
| Quelle | In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39 (2013) 1, S.313-316 (4 Seiten)
PDF als Volltext |
| Sprache | englisch |
| Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz |
| ISSN | 0278-7393 |
| DOI | 10.1037/a0028473 |
| Schlagwörter | Stellungnahme; Experimental Psychology; Pictorial Stimuli; Naming; Theories; Verbal Communication; Cognitive Processes |
| Abstract | In their comment, Roelofs, Piai, and Schriefers (2011) argue against our interpretation of the distractor frequency effect in terms of a late blocking mechanism. They state that the experiments reported by Dhooge and Hartsuiker (2010) can be incorporated in WEAVER++ when assuming an early input blocking mechanism. We first rectify a misunderstanding regarding the claim of the target article. Next, we show that Roelofs et al. provide no evidence that allows differentiating between early and late blocking accounts. We end by providing evidence in favor of our claim that distractor blocking occurs late and specify our blocking account in terms of verbal self-monitoring. (Contains 1 footnote.) (As Provided). |
| Anmerkungen | American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org/publications |
| Erfasst von | ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC |
| Update | 2017/4/10 |
Literaturbeschaffung und Bestandsnachweise in Bibliotheken prüfen
Permalink als QR-Code
Inhalt auf sozialen Plattformen teilen (nur vorhanden, wenn Javascript eingeschaltet ist)
Teile diese Seite:
