Target-alone RT is approximately 30 msec faster in blocked no-noise trials than in trials intermixed with noise conditions, indicating a preparatory inhibitory set¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 1974 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? RT to the target letter alone presented in blocked trials was significantly faster than to the target alone presented in mixed blocks containing noise conditions. → Eriksen 1974

Evidence¶

Eriksen 1974¶

Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16(1), 143-149. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03203267

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Three-way ANOVA (Ss by Target Letter by Mixed vs Blocked Trial Presentation) on the two target-alone control conditions. The article reports the blocked condition averaged approximately 30 msec faster than the mixed control, which it takes as evidence of a preparatory set to inhibit responses to noise letters.

"The effect for mixed vs blocked trials was significant [F(I,5) =42.38, p < .01], as was that for Ss [F(5,3) = 20.87, p < .05] ."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Response-incompatible flanking noise letters impair target reaction time significantly more than response-compatible noise in a nonsearch task — related
• Heterogeneous noise letters with set-related features produce intermediate RT impairment, consistent with stimulus generalization at wider spacings — related
• Target RT decreases as between-letter spacing increases, and the noise-condition effect is greatest at the closest spacing (Noise Condition by Spacing interaction) — related
• Error data mirror the RT findings: opposite-response-set noise caused far more errors at the two closest spacings
• Bilingual 8-year-olds show no switching cost between blocked and mixed trial blocks, unlike monolinguals — reports the opposite