@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{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}},
}