Диссертация (1098979), страница 30
Текст из файла (страница 30)
2008. P.3773.Dickinson C.A., Intraub H. Spatial asymmetries in viewing andremembering scenes: Consequences of an attentional bias? // Attention,Perception &Psychophysics. 2009. Vol.71. P.1251–126274.Downing P., Liu J., Kanwisher N. Testing cognitive models of visualattention with fMRI and MEG // Neuropsychologia. 2001. Vol.39(12).P.1329-134275.Drummond L., Shomstein S. The timecourse of space- and object-basedattentional prioritization with varying degrees of certainty // Frontiers in158Integrative Neuroscience.
2013. Vol.7:88. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2013.00088.eCollection 201376.Duncan J. Selective atention and the organization of visual information //Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 1984. Vol.113(4). P.501-51777.Egly R., Driver J., Rafal R.D. Shifting visual attention between objects andlocations: evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects // Journal ofExperimental Psychology: General. 1994. Vol.123(2). P.161-17778.Ellis A.W. Length, formats, neighbours, hemispheres, and the processing ofwords presented laterally or at fixation // Brain and Language.
2004.Vol.88(3). P.355-36679.Ellis A.W., Ferreira R., Cathles-Hagan P., Holt K., Jarvis L., Barca L. Wordlearning and the cerebral hemispheres: from serial to parallel processing ofwritten words // Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B:Biological Sciences. 2009. Vol.364(1536). P.3675-3696.80.Ellis A.W., Young A.W., Anderson C.
Modes of word recognition in the leftand right cerebral hemispheres // Brain and Language. 1988. Vol.35(2).P.254–273.81.Enns J.T. Object substitution and its relation to other forms of visualmasking // Vision Research. 2004. Vol.44(12). P.1321-133182.Eriksen A.B., Erkisen C.W. Effects of noise letters upon the identification ofa target letter in a nonsearch task // Perception & Psychophysics. 1974.Vol.16(1).
P.143-14983.Feria C.S. Attentional prioritizations based on spatial probabilities can bemaintained on multiple moving objects // Attention, Perception, &Psychophysics. 2010. Vol.72(4). P.926-93884.Fine E.M. Does meaning matter? The impact of word knowledge on lateralmasking // Optometry & Vision Science.
2001. Vol.78(11). P.831-83885.Fink G.R., Dolan R.J., Halligan P.W., Marshall J.C., Frith C.D. Space-basedand object-based visual attention: shared and specific neural domains //Brain: a Journal of Neurology. 1997. Vol.120(Pt 11). P.2013-202815986.Fitts P.M. The information capacity of the human motor system incontrolling the amplitude of movement // Journal of ExperimentalPsychology. 1954. Vol.47(6). P.381-39187.Friedman-Hill S.R., Robertson L.C., Treisman A. Parietal contributions tovisual feature binding: evidence from a patient with bilateral lesions //Science.
1995. Vol.269(5225). P.853-85588.Frings C., Wühr P. Don't be afraid of irrelevant words: the emotional Stroopeffect is confined to attended words // Cognition & Emotion. 2012.Vol.26(6). P.1056-106889.Gatti S.V., Egeth H.E. Failure of spatial selectivity in vision // Bulletin ofthe Psychonomic Society. 1978. Vol.11(3). P.181-18490.Gazzaniga M. S., Hutsler J.
J. Hemispheric specialization. In R. A. Wilson& F C. Keil (Eds.), The MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences (pp.369-372). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 199991.Grainger J., Bouttevin S., Truc C., Bastien M., Ziegler J. Word superiority,pseudoword superiority, and learning to read: A comparison of dyslexic andnormal readers // Brain and Language.
2003. Vol.87(3). P.1105-111492.Grainger J., Jacobs A.M. A dual read-out model of word context effects inletter perception: Further investigations of the word superiority effect //Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.1994. Vol.20(6). P.1158-117693.Hagenbeek R.E., Van Strien J.W. Left-right and upper-lower visual fieldasymmetries for face matching, letter naming, and lexical decision // Brainand Cognition. 2002. Vol.49. P.34-44.94.He S., Cavanagh P., Intrilligator J. Attentional resolution and the locus ofvisual awareness // Nature. 1996. Vol.383.
P. 334-337.95.Hohstein S., Ahissar M. View from the top: hierarchies and reversehierarchies in the visual system // Neuron. 2002. Vol.36. P.791-80496.Horowitz T.S., Wolfe J.M. Visual search has no memory // Nature. 1998.Vol. 394(6693). P.575-57716097.Houpt J.W., Townsend J.T., Donkin C. A new perspective on visual wordprocessing efficiency // Acta Psychologica. 2014. Vol.145. P.118-12798.Hudson C., Howe P.D., Little D.R. Hemifield effects in multiple identitytracking // PLoS One. 2012. Vol.7(8):e43796.99.Iacoboni M., Zaidel E. Hemispheric Independence in Word Recognition:Evidence from Unilateral and Bilateral Presentations // Brain and Language.1996.
Vol.53(1). P. 121-140100.Jewell G., McCourt M.E. Pseudoneglect: A review and meta-analysisof performance factors in line bisection tasks // Neuropsychologia. 2000.Vol.38. P.93–110101.Johnson D.N., McGrath A., McNeil C. Cuing interacts with perceptualload in visual search // Psychological Science. 2002.
Vol.13(3). P.284-287102.Johnston J.C., McClelland J.L. Perception of letters in words: Seeknot and ye shall find // Science. 1974. Vol.184(4142). P.1192-1194103.Jonides J. Voluntary versus automatic control over the mind's eye'smovement // Long J.B., Baddeley A.D. (Eds.) Attention and PerformanceIX.
1981. P.187-203. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum104.Jordan T.R., Patching G.R., Milner A.D. Lateralized wordrecognition: assessing the role of hemispheric specialization, modes oflexical access, and perceptual asymmetry // Journal of ExperimentalPsychology: Human Perception and Performance. 2000. Vol.26(3). P.11921208105.Jordan T.R., Redwood M., Patching G.R. Effects of form familiarityon perception of words, pseudowords, and nonwords in the two cerebralhemispheres // Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.
2003. Vol.15(4). P.537548106.Josev E.K., Forte J.D., Nicholls M.E. Left of centre: asymmetries forthe horizontal vertical line illusion // Psychological Research. 2011.Vol.75(5). P.435-443161107.Jung-Beeman M. Bilateral brain processes for comprehending naturallanguage // Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2005. Vol.9(11). P.512-518.108.Kahneman D., Chajczyk D. Tests of the automaticity of reading:Dulution of Stroop effects by color-irrelevant stimuli // Journal ofExperimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfomance.
1983.Vol.9(4). P.497-509109.Kahneman D., Henik A. Perceptual organization and attention // InM.Kubovy, J.R. Pomerantz (Eds.), Perceptual organization. 1981. P.181211. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum110.Kahneman D., Treisman A. Changing views of attention andautomacity // In R. Parasuraman, R. Davies (Eds.), Varieties of attention.1984.
P.29-61. New York: Academic Press111.Kahneman D., Treisman A., Gibbs B.J. The reviewing of object files:object-specific integration of information // Cognitive Psychology. 1992.Vol.24(2). P.175-219112.Kanwisher N.G. Repetition blindness: type recognition without tokenindividuation // Cognition. 1987. Vol.27(2). P.117-143113.Karim A.K., Kojima H. The what and why of perceptual asymmetriesin the visual domain // Advances in Cognitive Psychology.
2010. Vol.6.P.103-115.114.Kawahara J., Zuvic S.M., Enns J.T., Di Lollo V. Task switchingmediates the attentional blink even without backward masking // Perception& Psychophysics. 2003. Vol.65(3). P.339-351115.Kimura D. Dual function asymmetry of the brain in visual perception// Neuropsychologia. 1966. Vol.4. P.275-285.116.Kingstone A., Enns J.T., Mangun G.R., Gazzaniga M.S. Guided visualsearch is a left-hemisphere process in split-brain patients // PsychologicalScience. 1995. Vol.6(2). P.118-121117.Kinoshita S., Norris D. Letter order is not coded by open bigrams //Journal of Memory and Language. 2013. Vol.69(2). P.135-150162118.Kinsbourne M.
The cerebral basis of lateral asymmetries in attention //Acta Psychologica. 1970. Vol.33. P.193-201119.Knecht S., Dräger B., Deppe M., Bobe L., Lohmann H., FlöelA., Ringelstein E.B., Henningsen H. Handedness and hemispheric languagedominance in healthy humans // Brain: a Journal of Neurology. 2000.Vol.123. Pt.12.
P.2512-2518120.Kosslyn S.M. Seeing and imagining in the cerebral hemispheres: acomputational approach // Psychological Review. 1987. Vol.94(2). P.148175121.Kravitz D.J., Behrmann M. Space-, object-, and feature-basedattention interact to organize visual scenes // Attention, Perception, &Psychophysics. 2011. Vol.73(8). P.2434-2447122.Lamy D., Egeth H. Object-based selection: the role of attentionalshifts // Perception & Psychophysics. 2002.
Vol.64(1). P.52-66123.Lamy D., Tsal Y. Object features, object locations, and object files:which does selective attention activate and when? // Journal of ExperimentalPsychology: Human Perception and Performance. 2000. Vol.26(4). P.13871400124.Laszlo S., Federmeier K.D. The acronym superiority effect //Psychonomic Bulletin and Review.
2007. Vol.14(6). P.1158-1163125.Lavidor M., Bailey P.J. Dissociations between serial position andnumber of letters effects in lateralised visual word recognition // Journal ofResearch in Reading. 2005. Vol.28(3). P.258-273126.Lavie N. The role of perceptual load in visual awareness // BrainResearch. 2006. Vol.1080(1). P.91-100127.Lavie N., Cox S.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
