@article{6085,
  abstract     = {{In three experiments, we tested whether sequentially coding two visual stimuli can create a spatial misperception of a visual moving stimulus. In Experiment 1, we showed that a spatial misperception, the flash-lag effect, is accompanied by a similar temporal misperception of first perceiving the flash and only then a change of the moving stimulus, when in fact the two events were exactly simultaneous. In Experiment 2, we demonstrated that when the spatial misperception of a flash-lag effect is absent, the temporal misperception is also absent. In Experiment 3, we extended these findings and showed that if the stimulus conditions require coding first a flash and subsequently a nearby moving stimulus, a spatial flash-lag effect is found, with the position of the moving stimulus being misperceived as shifted in the direction of its motion, whereas this spatial misperception is reversed so that the moving stimulus is misperceived as shifted in a direction opposite to its motion when the c}},
  author       = {{Priess, Heinz-Werner and Scharlau, Ingrid and Becker, Stefanie I. and Ansorge, Ulrich}},
  issn         = {{1943-3921}},
  journal      = {{Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics}},
  keywords     = {{spatial mislocalization, sequential coding, stimulus parameters, Attention, Discrimination (Psychology), Humans, Judgment, Motion Perception, Optical Illusions, Orientation, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Psychophysics, Space Perception, Cognitive Processes, Motion Perception, Perceptual Localization, Spatial Perception, Stimulus Parameters, Consequence}},
  number       = {{2}},
  pages        = {{365 -- 378}},
  title        = {{{Spatial mislocalization as a consequence of sequential coding of stimuli.}}},
  volume       = {{74}},
  year         = {{2012}},
}

@article{6082,
  abstract     = {{When two targets are presented in rapid succession, the first target (T1) is usually identified, but the second target (T2) is often missed. A remarkable exception to this 'attentional blink' occurs when T2 immediately follows the first T1, at lag 1. It is then often spared but reported in the wrong order—that is, before T1. These order reversals have led to the hypothesis that 'lag 1 sparing' occurs because the two targets merge into a single episodic representation. Here, we report evidence consistent with an alternative theory: T2 receives more attention than T1, leading to prior entry into working memory. Two experiments showed that the more T2 performance exceeded that for T1, the more order reversals were made. Furthermore, precuing T1 led to a shift in performance benefits from T2 to T1 and to an equivalent reduction in order reversals. We conclude that it is not necessary to assume episodic integration to explain lag 1 sparing or the accompanying order reversals. (PsycINFO Dat}},
  author       = {{Olivers, Christian N. L. and Hilkenmeier, Frederic and Scharlau, Ingrid}},
  issn         = {{1943-3921}},
  journal      = {{Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics}},
  keywords     = {{attentional blink, order reversals, prior entry, working memory, visual attention, attentional performance, Adolescent, Adult, Attention, Attentional Blink, Color Perception, Cues, Discrimination (Psychology), Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Psychophysics, Reaction Time, Reversal Learning, Sensory Gating, Serial Learning, Young Adult, Eyeblink Reflex, Stimulus Change, Stimulus Parameters, Visual Attention, Attentional Blink, Short Term Memory}},
  number       = {{1}},
  pages        = {{53 -- 67}},
  title        = {{{Prior entry explains order reversals in the attentional blink.}}},
  volume       = {{73}},
  year         = {{2011}},
}

@article{6084,
  abstract     = {{Attended stimuli are perceived as occurring earlier than unattended stimuli. This phenomenon of prior entry is usually identified by a shift in the point of subjective simultaneity (PSS) in temporal order judgements (TOJs). According to its traditional psychophysical interpretation, the PSS coincides with the perception of simultaneity. This assumption is, however, questionable. Technically, the PSS represents the temporal interval between two stimuli at which the two alternative TOJs are equally likely. Thus it also seems possible that observers perceive not simultaneity, but uncertainty of temporal order. This possibility is supported by prior-entry studies, which find that perception of simultaneity is not very likely at the PSS. The present study tested the percept at the PSS in prior entry, using peripheral cues to orient attention. We found that manipulating attention caused varying temporal perceptions around the PSS. On some occasions observers perceived the two stimuli as sim}},
  author       = {{Weiß, Katharina and Scharlau, Ingrid}},
  issn         = {{1747-0218}},
  journal      = {{The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology}},
  keywords     = {{temporal order perception, simultaneity, temporal order judgment, attention, visual perception, Adolescent, Adult, Attention, Cues, Discrimination (Psychology), Female, Humans, Judgment, Male, Models, Psychological, Photic Stimulation, Reaction Time, Time Factors, Uncertainty, Visual Perception, Young Adult, Attention, Judgment, Stimulus Similarity, Time Perception, Visual Discrimination, Temporal Order (Judgment)}},
  number       = {{2}},
  pages        = {{394 -- 416}},
  title        = {{{Simultaneity and temporal order perception: Different sides of the same coin? Evidence from a visual prior-entry study.}}},
  volume       = {{64}},
  year         = {{2011}},
}

@article{6065,
  abstract     = {{In the direct parameter specification (DPS) mode of sensorimotor control, response parameters can be specified by stimuli that are not consciously perceived [Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung 52 (1990) 207]. DPS is contingent on the current intentions. The invisible stimuli can be processed for the purposes of sensorimotor control only if they match the actual intentions, for example, share task-relevant features. The present experiments explore whether attentional capture by masked abrupt-onset stimuli is mediated via DPS. Participants judged which of two visual targets appeared first. Masked primes preceded one of the targets. The primes were either similar to the targets or not, in shape, or in color. Target-like (task-relevant), but not distractor-like (task-irrelevant), primes facilitated perceptual latencies of targets trailing at their positions. Thus, the latency effects resulted from DPS of an attention shift, rather than from bottom-up capture or from top-down }},
  author       = {{Scharlau, Ingrid and Ansorge, Ulrich}},
  issn         = {{0042-6989}},
  journal      = {{Vision Research}},
  keywords     = {{direct parameter specification, DPS, attention shift, latency priming, sensorimotor control, stimuli, task-relevant features, visual targets, color, shape, latency effects, Adult, Attention, Discrimination (Psychology), Female, Humans, Judgment, Male, Perceptual Masking, Reaction Time, Visual Perception, Attention, Perceptual Motor Processes, Response Latency, Stimulus Onset, Visual Stimulation, Form and Shape Perception, Sensory Adaptation}},
  number       = {{12}},
  pages        = {{1351 -- 1363}},
  title        = {{{Direct parameter specification of an attention shift: Evidence from perceptual latency priming.}}},
  volume       = {{43}},
  year         = {{2003}},
}