En este trabajo, tratamos de comparar el desarrollo de la automaticidad en tareas de búsqueda visual cuando se utiliza como estimulación material familiar y no familiar para el sujeto. Los estímulos no familiares empleados eran equiparables a los caracteres alfanuméricos, únicamente se diferenciaban en el grado de familiaridad. Analizamos si se alcanzan los mismos niveles de automatización en ambos casos, y si los factores que afectaban el desarrollo de la automaticidad eran los mismo. Para ello, diseñamos la misma tarea con estimulación familiar y no familiar, y consideramos los diferentes niveles de consistencia y discriminabilidad. Una vez obtenidos y analizados los resultados encontramos que en ambos casos se alcanzaban los mismos niveles de automatización, aunque cuando el material no era familiar se precisaba mayor cantidad de entrenamiento. Además, en este caso, los aspectos perceptivos como la discriminabilidad entre los objetivos y los distractores incidía en el desarrollo de un procesamiento en paralelo.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AtkinsonR. C.JuolaJ. F. (1973). Factors influencing speed and accuracy of word recognition. EnKornblumS. (Ed.), Attention and performance IV.Nueva York: Academic Press.
2.
BagnaraS.VisciolaM.SalmasoD. (1985). Differential automatization processes as a function of the type of stimuli. EnBronwnI. D.GoldsmithR.CoombesK.SincalirM.A. (Eds.), Ergonomics international85 (pp. 619–621). Londres: Taylor & Francis.
3.
BarbeeJ. G.BlackI. L. (1984). Critical stimulus durations for some verbal and nonverbal stimuli.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 59, 1001–1002.
4.
BurrowsD.OkadaD. (1975). Memory retrieval from long and short lists.Science, 188, 1031–1033.
5.
DehaeneS. (1989). Discriminability and dimensionality effects in visual search for featural conjunctions: A functional pop-out.Perception and Psychophysics, 46, 72–80.
6.
EbertsR.SchneiderW. (1986). Effects of perceptual training of sequenced line movements.Perception and Psychophysics, 39, 236–247.
EgethH. E.VirziR. A.GarbartH. (1984). Searching for conjuctively defined targets.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 32–39.
9.
FisherD. L. (1982). Limited-channel models of automatic detection: Capacity and scanning in visual search.Psychological Review, 89, 662–692.
10.
FisherD. L. (1984). Central capacity limits in consistent mapping, visual search tasks: Four channels or more?Cognitive Psychology, 16449–484.
11.
FisherD. L.DuffyS. A.PollatsekA. (1988). Understanding the central processing limit in consistent-mapping visual search.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 253–266.
12.
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.
13.
FiskA. D.SchneiderW. (1984). Memory as a function of attention, level of processing, and automatization.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 10, 181–197.
14.
GilmoreG. C. (1980). Letter interactions in brief visual displays.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 649–668.
15.
GleitmanH.JonidesJ. (1976). The cost of categorization in visual search: incomplete processing of targets and field items.Perception and Psychophysics, 20, 281–288.
16.
GleitmanH.JonidesJ. (1978). The effects of set on categorization in visual search.Perception and Psychophysics, 24, 361–368.
17.
GoodmanD. (1987). The complete HyperCard Handbook.Toronto: Bantam Books.
JonidesJ.GleitmanH. (1972). A conceptual category effect in visual search: O as letter or as digit.Perception and Psychophysics, 12, 457–460.
20.
JonidesJ.GleitmanH. (1976). The benefit of categorization in visual search: Target location without identification.Perception and Psychophysics, 20, 289–298.
21.
KoelegaH. S.BrinkmanJ. A.HendrisL.VerbatenM. N. (1989). Processing demands, effort, and individual differences in four different vigilance tasks.Human Factors, 31, 45–62.
22.
KristoffersonM. W. (1977). The effects of practice with one positive set in a memory-scanning task can be completely transferred to a different positive set.Memory and Cognition, 5, 177–186.
23.
MyersG. L.FiskA. D. (1987). Training consistent task components: Application of automatic and controlled processing theory to industrial task training.Human Factors, 29, 255–268.
24.
PalmerJ. (1990). Attention limits on the perception and memory of visual information.Journal of experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 332–350.
25.
SchneiderWFiskA. D. (1984). Automatic category search and its transfer.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 1–15.
26.
SchneiderW.ShiffrinR. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention.Psychological Review, 84, 1–66.
27.
ShawM. L. (1980). Identifying attentional and decision-making components in information processing. EnNickerson (Ed.), Attention and performance VIII.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Eribaum Associates.
28.
ShawM. L. (1984). Division of attention among spatial locations: A fundamental difference between detection of letters and detection of luminance increments. EnBoumaH.BouwhuisD. G. (Eds.), Attention and performance X. Control of Language processes.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Eribaum Associates.
29.
ShiffrinR. M.SchneiderW. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual Learning, automatic attending, and a general theory.Psychological Review, 84, 127–190.
30.
TaylorD. A. (1978). Identification and categorization of letters and digits.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4, 423–439.
31.
TreismanA. M.GeladeG. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention.Cognitive Psychology.13, 97–136.
