Table 1.
Characteristics of participants in the TD and ID groups.
Fig 1.
Illustration of the experimental design.
(A) Sequence of events and time course of a trial in the visual search task. On each trial, a target number to search for was first presented (2s), then a spatial cue that gives information about the location (left or right side) of the upcoming target was presented (1s). In this example, the visual endogenous cue (central unidirectional arrow) is illustrated. Then, participants searched for the cube on which the target number is written and touched it with a virtual hand. The feedback about the accuracy of the response was given (1s). (B) Illustration of different cue types in the experiment. The cue types were categorized based on its sensory modality (visual, auditory, tactile) and origin (endogenous, exogenous). Neutral cues did not give any information about the location of the upcoming target.
Fig 2.
Mean inverse efficiency for neutral versus informative cues, shown separately for the typically developing group (TD) and the intellectual disability group (ID).
Error bars represent the SEM in all figures. **p < .01, ***p < .001.
Fig 3.
Mean cue effect for each cue type, based on the origin (endogenous, exogenous) and sense (visual, auditory, tactile) of the cue, shown separately for the TD and ID groups.
The cue effect was calculated by subtracting the IE value for each cue type from that of the neutral cue, such that higher values represent greater cueing effects.
Fig 4.
Mean cue effect for each exogenous cue type, shown separately for the TD and ID groups.
Fig 5.
The repetition priming effect for different conditions.
(A) Mean inverse efficiency for cue type non-repeated vs. repeated trials in the TD and ID groups. (B) Mean inverse efficiency for target location non-repeated vs. repeated trials in the TD and ID groups. (C) Mean inverse efficiency for target side non-repeated vs. repeated trials in the TD and ID groups. **p < .01, ***p < .001.