Shoppers Have To See These Particular Awe-Inspiring Ramoplanin Short Clips

As shown in Table ?Table22 (see also Figure ?Figure44), the facilitatory effect was smaller in the object-centered and retinotopic conditions than in the baseline and spatiotopic conditions of Experiment 1 (19 and 31 ms vs. 54 and 41 ms; p��s whereas it was comparable across all reference frame conditions in Experiment 2 (38, 54, 38, and 47 ms; p��s > 0.10; data for the object-centered, baseline, retinotopic, and spatiotopic conditions, respectively). In contrast to facilitatory priming, inhibitory distractor location priming was comparable across the two experiments and reference frame conditions (Experiment 1: 21, 28, 26, 25 ms; Experiment 2: 27, 40, 25, 36 ms; p��s > 0.10; data for the object-centered, baseline, retinotopic, and spatiotopic conditions, respectively). FIGURE 4 Target location facilitation reaction time (RT target-at-target minus RT target-at-neutral location; upper panel; in ms) and distractor location inhibition (RT target-at-distractor minus RT target-at-neutral location; lower panel; in ms) in Experiments ... To recap our hypothesis, we expected to find differences in the representations of target and distractor locations between the ��predictable�� Experiment 1 and ��non-predictable�� Experiment 2. The results reported above show that facilitatory and inhibitory priming effects are indeed supported by multiple reference frames. Another way to look at the data is to Ramoplanin compute the relative contributions of retinotopic, spatiotopic, and object-centered representations to priming in the baseline condition. According to the logic introduced above, the object-centered condition provides a pure measure of object-centered priming (��o), because in this condition only information pertaining to the triangular configuration of the search items (the ��object��) is repeated across trials. Spatiotopic (��s) and retinotopic (��r) priming can then be assessed by subtracting priming effects in the object-centered condition from priming effects in the spatiotopic and retinotopic conditions. Additivity of position priming would be reflected by the sum of the object-centered (��o), spatiotopic (��s), and retinotopic priming (��r) being comparable to priming in the baseline condition3. The results of this analysis are presented in Figure ?Figure44. For Experiment 1, object-centered target location priming accounted for approximately 36% of priming in the baseline condition (retinotopic priming: ~23%; spatiotopic priming: ~41%). However, for Experiment 2, the contribution of object-centered target location priming increased to ~78% of total priming in the baseline condition (retinotopic priming: ~1%; spatiotopic priming: ~8%).