Диссертация (1097305), страница 59
Текст из файла (страница 59)
(2001)Segmentation, attention and phenomenal visual objects. // Cognition.80(1-2): 61-95.254. Dufau S., Grainger J., Midgley K.J., Holcomb P.J. A thousand words areworth a picture: Snapshots of printed-word processing in an event-relatedpotential megastudy. // Psychological Science. 2015. Epub ahead of print.255. Duncan J. (1984) Selective attention and the organization of visualinformation. // Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 113(4): 501517.256.
Duncan J., Humphreys G.W. (1989) Visual search and stimulussimilarity. // Psychological Review. 96(3): 433-458.257. Eckstein M.P., Mack S.C., Liston D.B., Bogush L., Menzel R., Krauzlis,R.J. (2013) Rethinking human visual attention: Spatial cueing effects andoptimality of decisions by honeybees, monkeys and humans.
// Visionresearch, 85: 5-19.258. Egeth H.E., Yantis S. (1997) Visual attention: Control, representation,and time course. // Annual Review of Psychology. 48: 269-297.259. Egly R., Driver J., Rafal R.D. (1994) Shifting visual attention betweenobjects and locations: Evidence from normal and parietal lesionsubjects. // Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
123(2): 161177.344260. Elliot A.J., Fryer J. (2008) The Goal Construct in Psychology. In J. Shah,W. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of Motivation Science. New York, NY:Guilford Press. Pp. 235-250261. Ellis A.W., Young A.W., Anderson C. (1988) Modes of word recognitionin the left and right cerebral hemispheres // Brain and Language.
35(2):254–273.262. Enns J.T. (2004) Object substitution and its relation to other forms ofvisual masking. // Vision Research, 44(12): 1321-1331.263. Enns J.T., Di Lollo V. (2000) What’s new in visual masking? // Trendsin Cognitive Science. 4(9): 345-352.264. Eriksen B.A., Eriksen C.W. (1974) Effects of noise letters upon theidentification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. // Perception andPsychophysics. 16(1): 143-149.265. Erlikhman G., Keane B.P., Mettler E., Horowitz T.S., Kellman P.J.(2013) Automatic feature-based grouping during multiple objecttracking.
// Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception andPerformance. 39(6): 1625-1637.266. Estes Z., Verges M., Barsalou L.W. (2008) Head up, foot down. Objectwords orient attention to the objects’ typical location. // PsychologicalScience, 19(2), 93–97.267. Falikman M. (2014) Cognition and its master: New challenges tocognitive science. // Cambridge Handbook of Cultural-HistoricalPsychology. Cambridge University Press. Pp.
474-487.268. Falikman M., Gorbunova E., Sinitsyna M. (2011) Location-based effectson object-based processing: Evidence from the word superiority effect. //Attenton and Objects: Rovereto Attention Workshop-2011. Abstracts.Rovereto: CIMEC.
URL: http://events.unitn.it/en/cimec-raw2011/269. Falikman M., Stepanov V. (2012) Chunking in rapid serial visualpresentation: Consequences for visual awareness // Neuroscience &cognition: Consciousness & cognitive control. Brussels, December 3-42012. P.33-34.270. Fan J., McCandliss B.D., Sommer T., Raz A., Posner M.I. (2002)345Testing the efficiency and independence of attentional networks. // Journalof Cognitive Neuroscience.
14(3): 340-347.271. Fernandez-Duque D., Johnson M.L. (1999) Attention metaphors: Howmetaphors guide the cognitive psychology of attention. // CognitiveScience. 23: 83-116.272. Fernandez-Duque D., Johnson M.L. (2002) Cause and Effect theories ofattention: The role of conceptual metaphors. // Review of GeneralPsychology. 6(2): 153-165.273. Fine E.M.
(2001a) Does meaning matter? The impact of wordknowledge on lateral masking. // Optometry and Vision Science. 78(11),831-838.274. Fine E.M. (2001b) The word-superiority effect does not depend on one'sability to identify the letter string as a word. Journal of Vision, 1(3):410,410a.275. Fine E.M. (2004) The relative benefit of word context is a constantproportion of letter identification time. // Perception and Psychophysics.66(6): 897-907.276. Firestone C., Scholl B. (in press) Cognition does not affect perception:Evaluating the evidence for 'top-down' effects // Behavioral and BrainSciences.277.
Flanagan P., McAnally K.I., Martin R.L., Meehan J.W., Oldfield S.R.(1998) Aurally and visually guided visual search in a virtual environment.// Human Factors. 40(3):461-468.278. Fodor J.A. (1983) Modularity of Mind: An Essay on FacultyPsychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.279. Franceschini S., Gori S., RuffinoM., Pedrolli K., Facoetti A. (2012) Acausal link between visual spatial attention and reading acquisition //Current Biology, 22(9): 814-819.280. Friedman A., Polson M.C., Dafoe C.G., Gaskill S.J. (1982) Dividingattention within and between hemispheres: Testing a multiple resourcesapproach to limited-capacity information processing.
// Journal ofExperimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8(5):346625-650.281. Friesen C.K., Kingstone A. (2003) Abrupt onsets and gaze directioncues trigger independent reflexive attentional effects. // Cognition, 87:B1–B10.282. Frischen A., Bayliss A.P., Tipper S.P. (2007) Gaze-cueing of attention:Visual attention, social cognition and individual differences //Psychological Bulletin. 133: 4.283. Frömer R., Dimigen O., Niefind F., Krause N., Kliegl R., Sommer W.(2015) Are individual differences in reading speed related to extrafovealvisual acuity and crowding? // PLoS ONE 10(3): e0121986.284.
Gardner H. (1987) The mind’s new science. The history of cognitiverevolution. USA: Harper Collins Publishers, Basic Books.285. Geng H.Y., Song Q.L., Li Y.F., Xu S., Zhu Y. (2007) Attentionalmodulation of motion-induced blindness // Chinese Science Bulletin. 52:1063-1070.286. Gilchrist I.D., North A., Hood B. (2001) Is visual search really likeforaging? // Perception.
30(12): 1459-1464.287. Gopher D. (1994) Dual-task performance. / In: M. Eysenck (Ed.). TheBlackwell dictionary of cognitive psychology. Great Britain, Cornwall.Pp. 111-117.288. Goschy H., Koch A.I., Mueller H.J., Zehetleitner M. (2014) Early topdown control over saccadic target selection: Evidence from a systematicsalience difference manipulation. // Attention, Perception andPsychophysics. 76(2): 367-382.289. Grabbe J.
(2014) Effects of targets embedded within words in a visualsearch task // Advances in Cognitive Psychology. 10(1): 1-8.290. Grainger J., Bouttevin S., Truc C., Bastien M., Ziegler J. (2003) Wordsuperiority, pseudoword superiority, and learning to read: A comparison ofdyslexic and normal readers. // Brain and Language, 66: 1105-1114.291. Grainger J., Jacobs A.M. (1994) A dual read-out model of word contexteffects in letter perception: Further investigations of the word superiorityeffect. // Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and347Performance, 20 (6), 1158-1176.292. Grainger J., Van Kang M.N., Segui J. (2001) Cross-modal repetitionpriming of heterographic homophones.
// Memory and Cognition.29(1):53-61.293. Greenberg S.N., Healy A.F., Koriat A., Kreiner H. (2004) The GOmodel: A reconsideration of the role of structure units in guiding andorganizing text online. // Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 11(1): 428433.294. Greenwald A.G. (1972) On doing two things at once: Time sharing as afunction of ideomotor compatibility. // Journal of ExperimentalPsychology. 94(1): 52-57.295.
Harre R. (2012) Perception. In: R. Harre, F.M. Moghaddam (Eds.)Psychology for the Third Millenium. Integrating cultural andneuroscience perspectives. Sage Publ. Pp. 56-76.296. Haselager W.F.G., van Dijk J., van Rooij I. (2008) A lazy brain?Embodied Embedded Cognition and Cognitive Neuroscience. In: P.Calvo, A. Gomila (Eds): Handbook of Cognitive Science. An embodiedapproach.
Oxford: Elsevier. Pp. 273-290.297. Hazy T.E., Frank M.J., O'Reilly R.C. (2006) Banishing the homunculus:making working memory work. // Neuroscience, 139(1): 105-118.298. Healy A.F., Cunningham T.F. (2004) Reading units that includeinterword spaces: Filling spaces around a letter can facilitate letterdetection. // Memory & Cognition, 32: 560-569.299. Healy A.F. (1994) Letter detection: A window to unitization and othercognitive processes. // Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1: 333-344.300. Henderson L. (1974) A word superiority effect without orthographicassistance // The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 26(2):301-311.301.
Hochstein S., Ahissar M. (2002) View from the top: Hierarchies andreverse hierarchies in the visual system. // Neuron. 36: 791-804.302. Holcombe A.O., Kanwisher N., Treisman A. (2001) The midstreamorder deficit. // Perception and Psychophysics. 63(2): 322-329.348303. Hollingworth A., Henderson J.M.
(2003) Testing a conceptual locus forthe inconsistent object change detection advantage in real-world scenes //Memory and Cognition. 31(6): 930-940.304. Houghton G., Tipper S.P. (1994) A model of inhibitory mechanisms inselective attention. In: D. Dagenbach, T.H. Carr (Eds.) Inhibitoryprocesses in attention memory and language. San Diego, CA: AcademicPress, pp. 53-112.305. Hruby G.
(2001) Sociological, postmodern, and new realismperspectives in social constructionism: Implications for literacyresearch. // Reading Research Quarterly, 36: 48-62.306. Huang L., Mo L., Li Y. (2012) Measuring the interrelations amongmultiple paradigms of visual attention: an individual differencesapproach. // Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception andPerformance, 38: 414-428.307. Hübner M., Kluwe R.H., Luna-Rodriguez A., Peters A. (2004) Taskpreparation and stimulus-evoked competition. // Acta Psychologica, 115:211-234.308.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
