August 2014
Volume 14, Issue 10
Free
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   August 2014
Too Much, Too Slow, or Too Flexible? Exploring The Influence of Task Difficulty on the Attentional Blink.
Author Affiliations
  • James Elliott
    Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences
  • Tom Bullock
    Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences
  • Barry Giesbrecht
    Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences
Journal of Vision August 2014, Vol.14, 526. doi:10.1167/14.10.526
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      James Elliott, Tom Bullock, Barry Giesbrecht; Too Much, Too Slow, or Too Flexible? Exploring The Influence of Task Difficulty on the Attentional Blink.. Journal of Vision 2014;14(10):526. doi: 10.1167/14.10.526.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Three accounts have been proposed to explain the influence of first target (T1) difficulty on the Attentional Blink (AB). The processing speed account (PSA; Visser, 2007) suggests that increasing T1 processing time increases the severity of the AB. Furthermore, the PSA suggests that the inclusion of a T1-mask prevents T1-difficulty from influencing the AB. The resource allocation account (RAA; Shore et al., 2001) suggests that T1-difficulty only influences the AB when resources are allocated prior to the start of the trial, and therefore should only be observed when T1-difficulty is blocked. Finally, the flexible selection account (FSA; Giesbrecht et al., 2007; 2009) suggests that T1-difficulty should decrease processing of subsequently presented information. We test the key predictions of these three accounts in two experiments using a standard RSVP task that evokes an AB (e.g., Chun & Potter, 1995) and in which T1-difficulty was manipulated using noise dots presented simultaneously with T1. In experiment 1, T1-difficulty increased the severity of the AB (F(5,65)=3.166, p = .033) even though T1 was always masked and T1-difficulty was intermixed. This result is inconsistent with both the PSA and the RAA. In experiment 2 we examined the influence of T1-difficulty on lag-1 sparing. While neither the RAA nor the PSA suggest that T1-difficulty should influence lag-1 performance, the FSA predicts that bottom-up differences in T1 processing partially determine the influence of T1-difficulty on the AB. Therefore, differences should be observable as soon as T1-processing commences. As predicted by FSA, increasing T1-difficulty increased the severity of the AB (F(5,100) = 3.122, p = .02) and decreased accuracy at lag-1 (t(20) = 5.016, p <.001). These results support the FSA of T1-difficulty, which suggests that attention during the AB is flexible and that T1-difficulty is one factor that modulates this flexibility.

Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2014

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×