<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
         xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
         xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
         xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
         xmlns:fabio="http://purl.org/spar/fabio/"
         xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#"
         xmlns:event="http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#"
         xmlns:ore="http://www.openarchives.org/ore/terms/">

    <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://ris.uni-paderborn.de/record/6064">
        <ore:isDescribedBy rdf:resource="https://ris.uni-paderborn.de/record/6064"/>
        <dc:title>At the mercy of prior entry: Prior entry induced by invisible primes is not susceptible to current intentions.</dc:title>
        <bibo:authorList rdf:parseType="Collection">
            <foaf:Person>
                <foaf:name></foaf:name>
                <foaf:surname></foaf:surname>
                <foaf:givenname></foaf:givenname>
            </foaf:Person>
            <foaf:Person>
                <foaf:name></foaf:name>
                <foaf:surname></foaf:surname>
                <foaf:givenname></foaf:givenname>
            </foaf:Person>
        </bibo:authorList>
        <bibo: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, &amp; 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</bibo:abstract>
        <bibo:volume>139</bibo:volume>
        <bibo:issue>1</bibo:issue>
        <bibo:startPage>54 - 64</bibo:startPage>
        <bibo:endPage>54 - 64</bibo:endPage>
    </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
