2,279 research outputs found

    A Quick Mind with Letters Can Be a Slow Mind with Natural Scenes: Individual Differences in Attentional Selection

    Get PDF
    Background Most people show a remarkable deficit in reporting the second of two targets (T2) when presented 200–500 ms after the first (T1), reflecting an ‘attentional blink’ (AB). However, there are large individual differences in the magnitude of the effect, with some people, referred to as ‘non-blinkers’, showing no such attentional restrictions. Methodology/Principal Findings Here we replicate these individual differences in a task requiring identification of two letters amongst digits, and show that the observed differences in T2 performance cannot be attributed to individual differences in T1 performance. In a second experiment, the generality of the non-blinkers' superior performance was tested using a task containing novel pictures rather than alphanumeric stimuli. A substantial AB was obtained in non-blinkers that was equivalent to that of ‘blinkers’. Conclusion/Significance The results suggest that non-blinkers employ an efficient target selection strategy that relies on well-learned alphabetic and numeric category sets.University of Groningen. Research School Behavioural and Cognitive Neuroscience

    Spreading the sparing: Against a limited-capacity account of the attentional blink.

    Get PDF
    The identification of the second of two targets presented in close succession is often impaired-a phenomenon referred to as the attentional blink. Extending earlier work (Di Lollo, Kawahara, Ghorashi, and Enns, in Psychological Research 69:191-200, 2005), the present study shows that increasing the number of targets in the stream can lead to remarkable improvements as long as there are no intervening distractors. In addition, items may even recover from an already induced blink whenever they are preceded by another target. It is shown that limited memory resources contribute to overall performance, but independent of the attentional blink. The findings argue against a limited-capacity account of the blink and suggest a strong role for attentional control processes that may be overzealously applied. © 2005 Springer-Verlag

    The absence of an auditory-visual attentional blink is not due to echoic memory.

    Get PDF
    Als binnen een halve seconde twee visuele items in een serieel aangeboden stroom moeten worden geselecteerd, is de prestatie voor het tweede item vaak relatief slecht (er treedt een “attentional blink” op); wanneer het eerste echter item auditief wordt aangeboden, verdwijnt de blink meestal. We hebben aangetoond dat dit laatste niet wordt veroorzaakt doordat proefpersonen hun echoïsch geheugen gebruiken om de verwerking van het auditieve item uit te stellen tot na het einde van de visuele stroom

    Erroneous selection of a non-target item improves subsequent target identification in rapid serial visual presentations

    Get PDF
    The second of two targets (T2) embedded in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVSVP) is often missed even though the first (T1) is correctly reported (attentional blink). The rate of correct T2 identification is quite high, however, when T2 comes immediately after T1 (lag-1 sparing). This study investigated whether and how non-target items induce lag-1 sparing. One T1 and two T2s comprising letters were inserted in distractors comprising symbols in each of two synchronised RSVSVPs. A digit (dummy) was presented with T1 in another stream. Lag-1 sparing occurred even at the location where the dummy was present (Experiment 1). This distractor-induced sparing effect was also obtained even when a Japanese katakana character (Experiment 2) was used as the dummy. The sparing effect was, however, severely weakened when symbols (Experiment 3) and Hebrew letters (Experiment 4) served as the dummy. Our findings suggest a tentative hypothesis that attentional set for item nameability is meta-categorically created and adopted to the dummy only when the dummy is nameable

    Dissociable Effects of Reward on Attentional Learning: From Passive Associations to Active Monitoring

    Get PDF
    Visual selective attention (VSA) is the cognitive function that regulates ongoing processing of retinal input in order for selected representations to gain privileged access to perceptual awareness and guide behavior, facilitating analysis of currently relevant information while suppressing the less relevant input. Recent findings indicate that the deployment of VSA is shaped according to past outcomes. Targets whose selection has led to rewarding outcomes become relatively easier to select in the future, and distracters that have been ignored with higher gains are more easily discarded. Although outcomes (monetary rewards) were completely predetermined in our prior studies, participants were told that higher rewards would follow more efficient responses. In a new experiment we have eliminated the illusory link between performance and outcomes by informing subjects that rewards were randomly assigned. This trivial yet crucial manipulation led to strikingly different results. Items that were associated more frequently with higher gains became more difficult to ignore, regardless of the role (target or distracter) they played when differential rewards were delivered. Therefore, VSA is shaped by two distinct reward-related learning mechanisms: one requiring active monitoring of performance and outcome, and a second one detecting the sheer association between objects in the environment (whether attended or ignored) and the more-or-less rewarding events that accompany them

    How Does Information Processing Speed Relate to the Attentional Blink?

    Get PDF
    Background When observers are asked to identify two targets in rapid sequence, they often suffer profound performance deficits for the second target, even when the spatial location of the targets is known. This attentional blink (AB) is usually attributed to the time required to process a previous target, implying that a link should exist between individual differences in information processing speed and the AB. Methodology/Principal Findings The present work investigated this question by examining the relationship between a rapid automatized naming task typically used to assess information-processing speed and the magnitude of the AB. The results indicated that faster processing actually resulted in a greater AB, but only when targets were presented amongst high similarity distractors. When target-distractor similarity was minimal, processing speed was unrelated to the AB. Conclusions/Significance Our findings indicate that information-processing speed is unrelated to target processing efficiency per se, but rather to individual differences in observers' ability to suppress distractors. This is consistent with evidence that individuals who are able to avoid distraction are more efficient at deploying temporal attention, but argues against a direct link between general processing speed and efficient information selection

    Target Cueing Provides Support for Target- and Resource-Based Models of the Attentional Blink

    Get PDF
    The attentional blink (AB) describes a time-based deficit in processing the second of two masked targets. The AB is attenuated if successive targets appear between the first and final target, or if a cueing target is positioned before the final target. Using various speeds of stimulus presentation, the current study employed successive targets and cueing targets to confirm and extend an understanding of target-target cueing in the AB. In Experiment 1, three targets were presented sequentially at rates of 30 msec/item or 90 msec/item. Successive targets presented at 90 msec improved performance compared with non-successive targets. However, accuracy was equivalently high for successive and non-successive targets presented at 30 msec/item, suggesting that–regardless of whether they occurred consecutively–those items fell within the temporally defined attentional window initiated by the first target. Using four different presentation speeds, Experiment 2 confirmed the time-based definition of the AB and the success of target-cueing at 30 msec/item. This experiment additionally revealed that cueing was most effective when resources were not devoted to the cue, thereby implicating capacity limitations in the AB. Across both experiments, a novel order-error measure suggested that errors tend to decrease with an increasing duration between the targets, but also revealed that certain stimulus conditions result in stable order accuracy. Overall, the results are best encapsulated by target-based and resource-sharing theories of the AB, which collectively value the contributions of capacity limitations and optimizing transient attention in time
    • …
    corecore