Citation

Navon D. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 1981; 7(6): 1175-1182.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1981, American Psychological Association)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

6458646

Abstract

In response to Miller's discussion of global precedence, I argue that (a)although perceptual precedence is not the only explanation for asymmetric interference, in some cases it is the most reasonable one; (b) since global precedence does not entail that local and global information cannot interact in their effects on responses, the finding that they do is not incompatible with global precedence; (c) it is dubious that attention or decision are applied just to the resultant of perception rather than determining it or constituting part of it. However, I share some of Miller's doubts about the unique contribution of asymmetric interference data in deciding the issue of global precedence.

Language: en