CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 424Visual perception and processing mechanismsVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Attention gating in short-term visual memory.

Reeves, Adam, Sperling, George·1986·Psychological Review
DOI 10.1037/0033-295x.93.2.180
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Subjects first detected a target embedded in a stream of letters presented at the left of fixation and then, as quickly as possible, shifted their attention to a stream of numerals at the right of fixation. They attempted to report, in order, the four earliest occurring numerals after the target. Numerals appeared at rates of 4.6,6.9,9.2, and 13.4/s. Scaling analyses were made of (a) item scores, P,(r), the probability of a numeral from stimulus position i appearing in response position r,r = (l,2,3, 4), and (b) order scores, PiBj, the probability that a numeral from stimulus position / ' appeared earlier in the response than one from stimulus position;'. For all subjects, targets, and numeral rates, the relative position of numerals in the response sequence showed clustering, disorder, and folding. Reported numerals tended to cluster around a stimulus position 400 ms after the target. The numerals were reported in an apparently haphazard order—at high numeral rates, inverted iBj pairs were as frequent as correct pairs. The actual order of report resulted from a mixture of correctly ordered numerals with numerals ordered in the direction opposite to their order of presentation (folding around the cluster center). These results are quantitatively described by a strength theory of order (precedence) and are efficiently predicted by a computational attention gating model (AGM). The AGM makes quantitatively correct predictions of over 500 values ofPt(r), PIBj in 12 conditions with two attention

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0033-295x.93.2.180

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 424

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Reeves, A., & Sperling, G.
Affiliations
Northeastern University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Psychological Review
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
1986
Volume
93
Issue
2
Pages
180-206
ISSN
  • 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1471
DOI
10.1037/0033-295x.93.2.180
OpenAlex
W2119524737
Cited by
422
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 14
FWCI
15.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
attentional gating, visual short-term memory, attentional blink, target detection, precedence, stimulus presentation rate
MeSH terms
Attention, Form Perception, Humans, Memory, Short-Term, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Psychophysics, Visual Fields

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review