An experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of order of report on multidimensional stimulus identification. Subjects were required to identify each two-dimensional symbol by pushing corresponding buttons on the keypad on which there were two columns representing the two dimensions. Order of report was manipulated for the dimension represented by the left or right column. Both behavioral data and event-related potentials were recorded from 14 college students. Behavioral data analysis showed that order of report had a significant effect on response times. Such results were consistent with those of previous studies. Analysis of event-related brain potentials showed significant differences in peak amplitude and mean amplitude at time windows of 120–250 msec. at Fz, F3, and F4 and of 350–750 msec. at Fz, F3, F4, Cz, and Pz. Data provided neurophysiological evidence that reporting dimensional values according to natural language habits was appropriate and less cognitively demanding.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AineC. J., & HarterM. R. (1986) Visual event-related potentials to colored patterns and color names: Attention to features and dimensions. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 54, 228–245.
2.
AllportD. A. (1971) Parallel encoding within and between elementary stimulus dimensions. Perception & Psychophysics, 10, 104–108.
3.
BarrettS. E., & RuggM. D. (1990) Event-related potentials and the semantic matching of pictures. Brain and Cognition, 14, 201–212.
4.
CarswellC. M., & WickensC. D. (1996) Mixing and matching lower-level codes for object displays: Evidence for two sources of proximity compatibility. Human Factors, 38, 1–23.
5.
ColesM. G. H., & RuggM. D. (1995) Event-related brain potentials: An introduction. In RuggM. D. & ColesM. G. H. (Eds.), Electrophysiology of mind: Event-related brain potential and cognition.New York: Oxford Univer. Press. Pp. 1–26.
FisherD. L., & TannerN. S. (1992) Optimal symbol set selection: A semiautomated procedure. Human Factors, 34, 79–95.
10.
GrattonG.ColesM. G. H.SirevaagE.EriksenC. W., & DonchinE. (1988) Pre- and post-stimulus activation of response channels: A psychophysiological analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 331–344.
11.
HarrisC. S., & HaberR. N. (1963) Selective attention and coding in visual perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 328–333.
12.
HillyardS. A.MangunG. R.WoldorffM. G., & LuckS. J. (1995) Neural systemsec. mediating selective attention. In GazzanigaM. S. (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pp. 665–681.
13.
HolcombP. J., & McPhersonW. B. (1994) Event-related brain potentials reflect semantic priming in an object decision task. Brain and Cognition, 24, 259–276.
14.
KenemansJ. L.KokA., & SmuldersF. T. Y. (1993) Event-related potentials to conjunctions of spatial frequency and orientation as a function of stimulus parameters and response requirements. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 88, 51–63.
15.
KenemansJ. L.SmuldersF. T. Y., & KokA. (1995) Selective procession of two-dimensional visual stimuli in young and old subjects: An electrophysiological analysis. Psychophysiology, 32, 108–120.
LappinJ. S. (1967) Attention in the identification of stimulus in complex visual displays. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75, 321–328.
18.
LawrenceD. H., & LaBergeD. L. (1956) Relationship between recognition accuracy and order of reporting stimulus dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51, 12–18.
19.
NäätänenR. (1992) Attention and brain function.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
20.
O'DonnellB. F.SwearerJ. M.SmithL. T.HokamaH., & McCarleyR. W. (1997) A topographic study of ERP elicited by visual feature discrimination. Brain Topography, 10, 133–143.
21.
OsgaG. (1982) An evaluation of identification performance for Raster Scan generated NTDS symbology. (Final Report) San Diego, CA: Naval Ocean System Center.
22.
PottsG. F.LiottiM.TuckerD. M., & PosnerM. I. (1996) Frontal and inferior temporal cortical activity in visual target detection: Evidence from high spatially sampled event-related potential. Brain Topography, 9, 3–14.
23.
RitterW.SimsonR., & VaughanH. G. (1983) Event-related potential correlated of two stages of information processing in physical and semantic discrimination tasks. Psychophysiology, 20, 168–179.
24.
RitterW.SimsonR.VaughanH. G., & FriedmanD. (1979) A brain event related to the making of a sensory discrimination. Science, 203, 1358–1361.
25.
ShiehK-K., & ChenF. F. (2002) Effects of report order and stimulus type on multidimensional stimulus identification. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 95, 783–794.
26.
ShiehK-K., & LaiC. J. (1996) Effects of practice on the identification of multidimensional stimulus. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 83, 435–448.
27.
ShiehK-K., & LaiC. J. (1997) Multidimensional stimulus identification: Instructing subjects in the order of reporting stimulus dimension. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 84, 995–1008.
28.
ShiehK-K.LaiC. J., & EllingstadV. S. (1996) Effects of report order, identification method, and stimulus characteristics on multidimensional stimulus identification. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 82, 99–111.
29.
SmidH. G. O. M.JakobA., & HeinzeH-J. (1999) An event-related brain potential study of visual selective attention to conjunctions of color and shape. Psychophysiology, 36, 264–279.
30.
TsangP. S., & BatesW. E. (1990) Resource of allocation and object displays. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 34th Annual Meeting.Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society. Pp. 1484–1488.
31.
van PettenC., & KutusM. (1987) Ambiguous words in context: An event-related potential analysis of the time course of meaning activation. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 188–208.
32.
WickensC. D., & AndreA. D. (1990) Proximity compatibility and information display: Effects of color, space, and objectness on information integration. Human Factors, 32, 61–77.
33.
WickensC. D., & CarswellC. M. (1995) The proximity compatibility principle: Its psychological foundation and relevance to display design. Human Factors, 37, 473–494.
