The Use of Iambic Pentameter in the

participants. Participants were then asked to group by the pre-constancy color of the
central column of circles in some trial blocks and by the post-constancy color in other
trial blocks. Since pre-constancy color grouping was observed to be more salient in short
stimulus durations in the Experiment 1, it was expected that participants would be faster
when grouping by pre-constancy color, relative to grouping by post-constancy color.
The mean reaction time for correct pre-constancy grouping responses was 605 ms
and that for post-constancy grouping responses was 175 ms greater. Thus, pre-constancy
color grouping was shown to be considerably faster than post-constancy grouping. In a
third experiment to further test this idea, Schulz and Sanocki (2003) presented the stimuli
for an unlimited amount of time. Participants were asked to group the central column of
circles by similarity and responses and reaction times were recorded. Based upon their
responses, the participants were divided into three groups, pre-constancy groupers, post-
constancy groupers, and mixed groupers. The mean reaction time for each of these types
was then computed. Schulz and Sanocki found that the participants who grouped
predominantly by pre-constancy color had a mean reaction time of 708ms, whereas those
who grouped predominantly by post-constancy color had a mean reaction time of
1600ms. Thus, faster responding was associated with pre-constancy color grouping and
slower responding with post-constancy grouping.
The results of Schulz and Sanocki (2003) show that color similarity grouping can
occur in more than one way, depending on exposure time. Exposure time limits may be
imposed by the task, as in Experiment 1, or imposed by the user, as in Experiment 2.
These findings also show that knowledge about the type of grouping that is available in
50