Illusory conjunctions die hard: A reply to Prinzmetal, Diedrichsen, and Ivry (2001).

2001/01/01 by Mieke Donk · 1 citation
Computer Science · #Advanced Algebra and Logic

paper · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.27.3.542

openalex publication_date 2001/01/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/25

Abstract

M. Donk (1999) showed that various data patterns that have been considered as evidence for the existence of illusory conjunctions may be due to errors of target-nontarget confusion, an account that challenges the mere existence of illusory conjunction.In a reply, W. Prinzmetal, J. Diedrichsen, and R. B. Ivry (2001) argued against this conclusion, claiming that some earlier findings can be explained only when one assumes that illusory conjunctions exist.The current article shows that Prinzmetal et al.'s claims cannot refute any of Donk's earlier conclusions, suggesting indeed that one can only conclude that "illusory conjunctions are an illusion.

Citations

• Effect of level of confusability on reporting letters from briefly presented visual displays
• Illusory conjunctions in the perception of objects
• A feature-integration theory of attention
• Illusory conjunctions inside and outside the focus of attention.
• Loosening the constraints on illusory conjunctions: Assessing the roles of exposure duration and attention.

Cited by

• Illusory conjunctions [wikipedia]