The theoretical and practical importance of search paradigms has been well established. This experiment was designed to extend understanding of learning processes in search tasks. Subjects trained under memory, visual, or hybrid memory/visual search conditions and then either transferred to a different search condition (e.g., train on memory, transfer to visual search) or served as controls (e.g., train on memory, transfer to memory search). Asymmetrical transfer was observed. These results have implications for current theories of attention as well as applicability in training situations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonJ. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2.
BattigW. F.MontagueW. E. (1969). Category norms for verbal items in 56 categories: A replication and extension of the Connecticut category norms. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph, 80, (Whole).
3.
CollenA.WickensD. D.DanieleL. (1975). The interrelationship of taxonomic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1, 629–633.
4.
FisherD. L.DuffyS. A.YoungC.PollatsekA. (1988). Understanding the central processing limit in consistentmapping visual search tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 253–266.
5.
FiskA. D.AckermanP. L.SchneiderW. (1987). Automatic and controlled processing theory and its application to human factors problems. In HancockP. A. (Ed.), Human factors psychology (pp. 159–197), New York: North-Holland Publishing Co.
6.
FiskA. D.SchneiderW. (1983). Category and word search: Generalizing search principles to complex processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition, 9, 177–195.
7.
HintzmanD. L. (1976). Repetition and memory. In BowerG. H. (Ed), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 10, pp. 47–91), New York: Academic Press.
8.
HodgeK. A. (1991). Transfer of Training as a Function of Semantic Relatedness in a category search task. Unpublished master's thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
9.
LoganG. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492–527.
10.
RogersW. A. (1989). Target and distractor learning in visual search: Age-related differences. Unpublished master's thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
11.
SchneiderW. (1985). Toward a model of attention and the development of automaticity. In PosnerM. I.MartinO. S. (Eds.), Attention and PerformanceVolume XI (pp 475–492). Hillsdale, NJ.: Erlbaum.
12.
SchneiderW.DetweilerM. (1987). A connectionist/control architecture for working memory. In BowerG. H. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 21, pp. 53–118). New York: Academic Press.
13.
SchneiderW.FiskA. D. (1983). Attentional theory and mechanisms for skilled performance. In MagilR. (Ed.), Memory and control in motor behavior.New York: North-Holland Publishing Co.
14.
SchneiderW.FiskA. D. (1984). Automatic category search and its transfer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 1–15.
15.
SchneiderW.ShiffrinR. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, attention. Psychological Review, 84, 1–66.
16.
ShiffrinR. M. (1988). Attention. In AtkinsonR. C.HerrnsteinR. J.LuceR. D. (Eds.), Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology (pp. 739–811). New York: Wiley and Sons.
17.
ShiffrinR. M.CzerwinskiM. P. (1988). A model of automatic attention attraction when mapping is partially consistent. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 562–569.
18.
ShiffrinR. M.SchneiderW. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127–190.
