English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

If several positions must be attended in a large visual display, does the efficiency of performance vary as a function of the display distance between these to-be-attended positions? Two previous experiments (Podgorny &amp; Shepard, 1983; Shaw, 1978) gave conflicting answers. In the present experiments, eight-letter circular displays were briefly presented. On each trial one, two, or three positions of the display were cued or precued. The number of noncued display positions intervening between the cued locations varied from zero to three. The subjects' task was to rapidly discriminate between two target letters. Although reaction time was found to increase with increases in the number of cued locations, no significant or suggestive effects were found for the spacing or distance between the cued locations. The evidence strongly suggests that the subjects serially searched the cued locations, which further implies that attention can index locations in the visual field at a speed that is independent of the distance between these locations.

Shifting of attentional focus within and about a visual display