@article{58473,
  abstract     = {{Using a large unique longitudinal survey data set from Germany covering more than 5,000 households, we analyze stated intentions and actual implementations of both flood-proofing and heat stress reduction measures to assess the intention behavior gap (IBG) in climate change adaptation. Our results do not only reveal a substantial IBG for most stated intentions, but also show their limits in serving as a good predictor for realized actions later. Moreover, the IBG itself can hardly be explained by observable household data characteristics. While we do find some similarities in explanatory variables affecting both intentions and implementations, these variables provide only little insights into the actual levels of implemented actions. In line with regret theory, the IBG in our data can be partly explained by anticipated regret caused by a feeling of having invested in vain in cases where adaptation measures are installed, but extreme weather events do not occur for the time being. Our results are informative for adaptation-related communication campaigns and public policy interventions, especially in the aftermath of natural disasters.}},
  author       = {{Osberghaus, Daniel and Botzen, Wouter and Kesternich, Martin}},
  journal      = {{Ecological Economics }},
  keywords     = {{Intention-behavior gap, Adaptation, Climate Change, Flooding, Heat}},
  title        = {{{The intention-behavior gap in climate change adaptation: Evidence from longitudinal survey data}}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}

@article{6064,
  abstract     = {{If one of two events is attended to, it will be perceived earlier than a simultaneously occurring unattended event. Since 150 years, this effect has been ascribed to the facilitating influence of attention, also known as prior entry. Yet, the attentional origin of prior-entry effects¹ has been repeatedly doubted. One criticism is that prior-entry effects might be due to biased decision processes that would mimic a temporal advantage for attended stimuli. Although most obvious biases have already been excluded experimentally (e.g. judgment criteria, response compatibility) and prior-entry effects have shown to persist (Shore, Spence, & Klein, 2001), many other biases are conceivable, which makes it difficult to put the debate to an end. Thus, we approach this problem the other way around by asking whether prior-entry effects can be biased voluntarily. Observers were informed about prior entry and instructed to reduce it as far as possible. For this aim they received continuous feedback}},
  author       = {{Weiß, Katharina and Scharlau, Ingrid}},
  issn         = {{0001-6918}},
  journal      = {{Acta Psychologica}},
  keywords     = {{intentions, events, attention, decision processes, Adult, Attention, Choice Behavior, Cues, Female, Humans, Intention, Judgment, Male, Middle Aged, Reaction Time, Time Perception, Visual Perception, Attention, Decision Making, Experiences (Events), Intention}},
  number       = {{1}},
  pages        = {{54 -- 64}},
  title        = {{{At the mercy of prior entry: Prior entry induced by invisible primes is not susceptible to current intentions.}}},
  volume       = {{139}},
  year         = {{2012}},
}

@article{28946,
  abstract     = {{The present study explores the deployment of attention towards nonconscious information. It is both theoretically and empirically likely that the deployment of attention can be controlled by information which is not consciously registered (attentional priming), similar to the control of sensorimotor responses by nonconscious information (response priming). However, not much is known about the functional basis of attentional priming. The present experiment explore whether and how strongly intentions (current action pans) determine whether attention is allocated towards invisible information (so called direct parameter specification). The results demonstrate that intention-mediated control is possible, but it seems to break down easily, that is to provide a weak and non-robust type of control.}},
  author       = {{Scharlau, Ingrid}},
  journal      = {{The 5th International Conference on Computer Vision Systems}},
  keywords     = {{visuo-spatial attention, metacontrast, masking, intention, direct parameter specification, perceptual latency, priming}},
  title        = {{{Control of Attention by Nonconscious Information: Do Intentions Play a Role?}}},
  doi          = {{10.2390/BIECOLL-ICVS2007-158}},
  year         = {{2007}},
}

@article{6072,
  abstract     = {{According to the concept of direct parameter specification, nonconsciously registered information can be processed to the extent that it matches currently active intentions of a person. This prediction was tested and confirmed in the current study. Masked visual information provided by peripheral cues led to reaction time (RT) effects only if the information specified one of the required responses (Experiments 1 and 3). Information delivered by the same masked cues that did not match the intentions was not used. However, the same information influenced RT if it was provided by visible cues (Experiments 2 and 3). The results suggest that the processing of nonconsciously registered information is flexible because it is susceptible to the changing intentions of a person. Yet, these processes are apparently restricted as nonconsciously registered information cannot be used as easily for purposes not corresponding to the currently active intentions as better visible information. (PsycINFO }},
  author       = {{Ansorge, Ulrich and Heumann, Manfred and Scharlau, Ingrid}},
  issn         = {{1053-8100}},
  journal      = {{Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal}},
  keywords     = {{active intentions, cues, direct parameter specification, nonconscious processing ability, Adult, Consciousness, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Processes, Perceptual Masking, Photic Stimulation, Visual Perception, Awareness, Cognitive Processes, Cues, Intention, Consciousness States, Probability}},
  number       = {{4}},
  pages        = {{528 -- 545}},
  title        = {{{Influences of visibility, intentions, and probability in a peripheral cuing task.}}},
  volume       = {{11}},
  year         = {{2002}},
}