Cargando…
T1 difficulty does not modulate the magnitude of the attentional blink
When the visual system is busy processing one stimulus, it has problems processing a subsequent stimulus if it arrives soon after the first. Laboratory studies of this second-stimulus impairment—known as attentional blink (AB)—have employed two targets (T1, T2) presented in rapid sequence, and have...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9245160/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34617833 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17470218211054750 |
_version_ | 1784738687534235648 |
---|---|
author | Spalek, Thomas M Lagroix, Hayley E P Di Lollo, Vincent |
author_facet | Spalek, Thomas M Lagroix, Hayley E P Di Lollo, Vincent |
author_sort | Spalek, Thomas M |
collection | PubMed |
description | When the visual system is busy processing one stimulus, it has problems processing a subsequent stimulus if it arrives soon after the first. Laboratory studies of this second-stimulus impairment—known as attentional blink (AB)—have employed two targets (T1, T2) presented in rapid sequence, and have found identification accuracy to be nearly perfect for T1, but impaired for T2. It is commonly believed that the magnitude of the AB is related directly to the difficulty of T1: the greater the T1 difficulty, the larger the AB. A survey of the experimental literature disconfirms that belief showing it to have arisen from artificial constraints imposed by the 100% limit of the response scale. Removal of that constraint, either using reaction time (RT) instead of accuracy as the dependent measure, or in experiments in which the functions of T2 accuracy over lags do not converge to the limit of the response scale, reveals parallel functions for the easy-T1 and the hard-T1 conditions, consistent with the idea that T1 difficulty does not modulate AB magnitude. This finding is problematic for all, but the Boost and Bounce (B&B) and the Locus Coeruleus–Norepinephrine (LC–NE) theories in which T1 acts merely as a trigger for an eventual refractory period that leads to the failure to process T2, rendering T1 difficulty and its relationship to the AB an irrelevant consideration. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9245160 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92451602022-07-01 T1 difficulty does not modulate the magnitude of the attentional blink Spalek, Thomas M Lagroix, Hayley E P Di Lollo, Vincent Q J Exp Psychol (Hove) Original Articles When the visual system is busy processing one stimulus, it has problems processing a subsequent stimulus if it arrives soon after the first. Laboratory studies of this second-stimulus impairment—known as attentional blink (AB)—have employed two targets (T1, T2) presented in rapid sequence, and have found identification accuracy to be nearly perfect for T1, but impaired for T2. It is commonly believed that the magnitude of the AB is related directly to the difficulty of T1: the greater the T1 difficulty, the larger the AB. A survey of the experimental literature disconfirms that belief showing it to have arisen from artificial constraints imposed by the 100% limit of the response scale. Removal of that constraint, either using reaction time (RT) instead of accuracy as the dependent measure, or in experiments in which the functions of T2 accuracy over lags do not converge to the limit of the response scale, reveals parallel functions for the easy-T1 and the hard-T1 conditions, consistent with the idea that T1 difficulty does not modulate AB magnitude. This finding is problematic for all, but the Boost and Bounce (B&B) and the Locus Coeruleus–Norepinephrine (LC–NE) theories in which T1 acts merely as a trigger for an eventual refractory period that leads to the failure to process T2, rendering T1 difficulty and its relationship to the AB an irrelevant consideration. SAGE Publications 2021-10-26 2022-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9245160/ /pubmed/34617833 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17470218211054750 Text en © Experimental Psychology Society 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Spalek, Thomas M Lagroix, Hayley E P Di Lollo, Vincent T1 difficulty does not modulate the magnitude of the attentional blink |
title | T1 difficulty does not modulate the magnitude of the attentional blink |
title_full | T1 difficulty does not modulate the magnitude of the attentional blink |
title_fullStr | T1 difficulty does not modulate the magnitude of the attentional blink |
title_full_unstemmed | T1 difficulty does not modulate the magnitude of the attentional blink |
title_short | T1 difficulty does not modulate the magnitude of the attentional blink |
title_sort | t1 difficulty does not modulate the magnitude of the attentional blink |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9245160/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34617833 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17470218211054750 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT spalekthomasm t1difficultydoesnotmodulatethemagnitudeoftheattentionalblink AT lagroixhayleyep t1difficultydoesnotmodulatethemagnitudeoftheattentionalblink AT dilollovincent t1difficultydoesnotmodulatethemagnitudeoftheattentionalblink |