Showing papers on "Attentional blink published in 2006"
TL;DR: The hypothesis that the attentional blink is due to an overinvestment of attentional resources in stimulus processing, a suboptimal processing mode that can be counteracted by manipulations promoting divided attention is supported.
Abstract: The attentional blink reflects the impaired ability to identify the 2nd of 2 targets presented in close succession--a phenomenon that is generally thought to reflect a fundamental cognitive limitation. However, the fundamental nature of this impairment has recently been called into question by the counterintuitive finding that task-irrelevant mental activity improves attentional blink performance (C. N. L. Olivers & S. Nieuwenhuis, 2005). The present study found a reduced attentional blink when participants concurrently performed an additional memory task, viewed pictures of positive affective content, or were instructed to focus less on the task. These findings support the hypothesis that the attentional blink is due to an overinvestment of attentional resources in stimulus processing, a suboptimal processing mode that can be counteracted by manipulations promoting divided attention.
301 citations
TL;DR: Electroencephalographic activity for nonblinkers and blinkers was measured during execution of a task in which two letters had to be detected in an sequential stream of digit distractors, suggesting that they are quicker to consolidate information than are blinkers.
Abstract: A well-established phenomenon in the study of attention is the attentional blink—a deficit in reporting the second of two targets when it occurs 200–500 msec after the first. Although the effect has been shown to be robust in a variety of task conditions, not every individual participant shows the effect. We measured electroencephalographic activity for “nonblinkers” and “blinkers” during execution of a task in which two letters had to be detected in an sequential stream of digit distractors. Nonblinkers showed an earlier P3 peak, suggesting that they are quicker to consolidate information than are blinkers. Differences in frontal selection positivity were also found, such that nonblinkers showed a larger difference between target and distractor activation than did blinkers. Nonblinkers seem to extract target information better than blinkers do, allowing them to reject distractors more easily and leaving sufficient resources available to report both targets.
179 citations
TL;DR: The results suggest that a set of mechanisms subserving the allocation of attention in the spatial domain, resulting in the N2pc, suffer significant interference from concurrent cognitive operations required to encode information into visual short-term memory.
Abstract: A variant of the rapid serial visual presentation paradigm was used to display sequentially two lateral sequences of stimuli, one to the left and one to the right of fixation, embedding two pairs of target stimuli, T1 and T2. T1 was composed of a pair of alphanumeric characters, and subjects had either to ignore T1 or to encode T1 for a delayed response. T2 was a lateral square of a prespecified color. The square had a small gap in one side, and the task for this stimulus was to report which side had the gap. When subjects were required to ignore T1, the T2-locked ERP produced a clear N2pc, that is, a greater negativity at electrode sites contralateral to the position occupied by T2. This N2pc was followed by a sustained posterior contralateral negativity (SPCN). When subjects were required to monitor T1 in addition to T2, both the N2pc and the SPCN components amplitude depended on the difficulty of the task associated with T1. If T1 was composed of digits that had to be encoded for a delayed same/different judgment, both the N2pc and the SPCN components were entirely suppressed. Although attenuated, such components were present when T1 was composed of a pair of symbols that subjects could disregard. The results suggest that a set of mechanisms subserving the allocation of attention in the spatial domain, resulting in the N2pc, suffer significant interference from concurrent cognitive operations required to encode information into visual short-term memory.
165 citations
TL;DR: Electrophysiological methods suggest that attention to T1 interfered with the deployment of visual spatial attention toT2, and N2pc was reduced in amplitude when subjects reported T1, and particularly so at the short SOA.
Abstract: We used electrophysiological methods to track the deployment of visual spatial attention while observers were engaged in concurrent central attentional processing, using a variant of the attentional blink paradigm. Two visual targets (T1, T2) were presented at a stimulus onset asynchrony of either 200 ms or 800 ms. T1 was a white digit among white letters presented on a dark background using rapid serial visual presentation at fixation. T2 was another digit that was presented to the left or right of fixation simultaneously with a distractor digit in the opposite visual field, each followed by a pattern mask. In each T2 display, one digit was red and one was green. Half of the subjects reported the red digit and ignored the green one, whereas the other half reported the green digit and ignored the red one. T1 and T2 were reported in one block of trials, and only T2 in another block (order counterbalanced across subjects). Accuracy of report of T2 was lower at short SOA than at long SOA when both T1 and T2 were reported, but was similar across SOA when only T2 was reported. The electrophysiological results focused on the N2pc component, which was used as an index of the locus of spatial attention. N2pc was reduced in amplitude when subjects reported T1, and particularly so at the short SOA. The results suggest that attention to T1 interfered with the deployment of visual spatial attention to T2.
163 citations
TL;DR: Temporary visual deficits can be induced by otherwise neutral distractors whose aversive associations have only recently been learned.
Abstract: The current study examines whether aversively conditioned stimuli can modulate attention to such a degree that they impair the perception of subsequently presented nonemotional targets. In the initial phase of this study, participants viewed 3 categories of photographs, 1 of which was paired with an aversive noise. Following conditioning, participants searched for a target embedded within a series of 17 rapidly presented images on each trial. Critically, a conditioned or unconditioned item from the initial phase appeared 200 ms or 800 ms before the target. At 200-ms lags but not 800-ms lags, the conditioned images impaired target detection relative to the other distractors. Thus, temporary visual deficits can be induced by otherwise neutral distractors whose aversive associations have only recently been learned.
157 citations
TL;DR: Williams et al. as discussed by the authors showed that the probability of behaviorally failing to correctly identify the second target can be predicted from the amount of attentional resources devoted to processing the first target, as indexed by T1 activation.
Abstract: Humans have di⁄culty processing more than one event at a time, as is evidenced by the attentional blink (‘blink’) phenomenon: the second of two targets in a visual stream of events cannot be reported accurately if it appears between 100 and 500 ms after the ¢rst. By using whole-head magnetoencephalography, we show that the probability of behaviourally failing to correctly identify the second target can be predicted from the amount of attentional resources devoted to processing the ¢rst target, as indexed byT1 activation. This important ¢nding supports resource sharing accounts of divided attention tasks such as the ‘blink’; that is, such tasks may re£ect an individual processing strategy rather than an immutable structural processing bottleneck. NeuroReport 17:163^166 � c 2006 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
153 citations
TL;DR: It is shown that the attentional blink should be ascribed to attentional selection, not consolidation of the first target in rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP).
Abstract: People often fail to recall the second of two visual targets presented within 500 ms in rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP). This effect is called the attentional blink. One explanation of the attentional blink is that processes involved in encoding the first target into memory are slow and capacity limited. Here, however, we show that the attentional blink should be ascribed to attentional selection, not consolidation of the first target. Rapid sequences of six letters were presented, and observers had to report either all the letters (whole-report condition) or a subset of the letters (partial-report condition). Selection in partial report was based on color (e.g., report the two red letters) or identity (i.e., report all letters from a particular letter onward). In both cases, recall of letters presented shortly after the first selected letter was impaired, whereas recall of the corresponding letters was relatively accurate with whole report.
129 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the role of past experience in the implementation of an attentional set was investigated and it was found that sufficient experience with a given set was necessary to facilitate persistence with it.
Abstract: What factors determine the implementation of attentional set? It is often assumed that set is determined only by experimenter instructions and characteristics of the immediate stimulus environment, yet it is likely that other factors play a role. The present experiments were designed to evaluate the latter possibility; specifically, the role of past experience was probed. In a 320-trial training phase, observers could use one of two possible attentional sets (but not both) to find colour-defined targets in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) stream of letters. In the subsequent 320-trial test phase, where either set could be used, observers persisted in using their pre-established sets through the remainder of the experiment, affirming a clear role of past experience in the implementation of attentional set. A second experiment revealed that sufficient experience with a given set was necessary to facilitate persistence with it. These results are consistent with models of executive control (e.g., Nor...
119 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, attentional control mechanisms using electrophysiological methods, focusing on the N2pc event-related potential (ERP), were studied to track the moment-by-moment deployment of visual spatial attention.
Abstract: We studied attentional control mechanisms using electrophysiological methods, focusing on the N2pc event-related potential (ERP), to track the moment-by-moment deployment of visual spatial attention. Two digits (T1 and T2, both red or both green, and masked, were embedded in a rapid serial visual presentation of letter distractors with an SOA of 200 ms or 800 ms. T1 was at fixation, whereas T2 was 3° to the left or right of fixation and presented with a concurrent equiluminant distractor digit in a different colour. T1 and T2 were reported in one block of trials, and only T2 in another block (order counterbalanced). Accuracy for T2 was lower at short SOA than at long SOA when both T1 and T2 were reported, suggesting an attentional blink (AB) effect. It was difficult to ignore T1 because T1 had the same colour as T2, producing a large deficit in T2 accuracy at short SOA in the control condition. The amplitude of the N2pc ERP component was attenuated in the short-SOA condition relative to the long-SOA condi...
100 citations
TL;DR: The scenario supports the idea that the AB arises from “biased competition”, with the top–down bias being generated by parietal–frontal interactions and the competition taking place between stimulus codes in temporal cortex.
Abstract: When people monitor a visual stream of rapidly presented stimuli for two targets (T1 and T2), they often miss T2 if it falls into a time window of about half a second after T1 onset-the attentional blink (AB). We provide an overview of recent neuroscientific studies devoted to analyze the neural processes underlying the AB and their temporal dynamics. The available evidence points to an attentional network involving temporal, right-parietal and frontal cortex, and suggests that the components of this neural network interact by means of synchronization and stimulus-induced desynchronization in the beta frequency range. We set up a neurocognitive scenario describing how the AB might emerge and why it depends on the presence of masks and the other event(s) the targets are embedded in. The scenario supports the idea that the AB arises from "biased competition", with the top-down bias being generated by parietal-frontal interactions and the competition taking place between stimulus codes in temporal cortex.
99 citations
TL;DR: If task-irrelevant visual motion and flicker also attenuate the AB is sought, which would add to the generality of the previous conclusions and emphasize an account based on the overallocation of attention.
Abstract: Our reduced ability to correctly report two sequentially presented targets is seen in the robust effect known as the attentional blink (AB; Raymond, Shapiro, & Arnell, 1992). One recent report (Olivers & Nieuwenhuis, 2005) strikingly reveals the AB to be virtually abolished when non-task-demanding music occurs in the background. The authors suggest that a diffuse attentional state is the mediating factor. Here, we seek to broaden the finding’s generality by determining if task-irrelevant visual motion and flicker also attenuate the AB. In our experiments, the AB task was presented together with a background field of moving dots that could moveaway from ortoward the central AB task, or flicker. In the control condition, the dots remained static. The AB was attenuated—though to different degrees—in all experimental conditions, but not in the static condition. Our findings add to the generality of the previous conclusions, and we emphasize an account based on the overallocation of attention.
TL;DR: It is shown that cuing is not interrupted by a distractor intervening between the cue and T2, and this findings provide evidence for a contingent, delayed selection account of the AB.
Abstract: In a previous study, it was shown that the attentional blink (AB)—the failure to recall the 2nd of 2 visual targets (T1 and T2) presented within 500 ms in rapid serial visual presentation—is reduced when T2 is preceded by a distractor that shares a feature with T2 (e.g., color; Nieuwenstein, Chun, van der Lubbe & Hooge, 2005). Here, this cuing effect is shown to be contingent on attentional set. For example, a red distractor letter preceding a green digit T2 is an effective cue when the task is to look for red and green digits, but the same red cue is relatively ineffective when the task is to look for only green digits or when the color of T2 is not specified. It is also shown that cuing is not interrupted by a distractor intervening between the cue and T2. These findings provide evidence for a contingent, delayed selection account of the AB.
TL;DR: It is concluded that the attentional blink (AB) is caused by a disruption in attentional set when a distractor is presented while the central executive is busy processing a leading target.
Abstract: Identification of the second of two brief targets is impaired at intertarget lags of less than about 500 msec. We compared two accounts of thisattentional blink (AB) by manipulating the number of digit distractors—and hence the lag—inserted among three letter targets in a rapid serial visual presentation stream of digit distractors. On the resource-depletion hypothesis, longer lags provide more time for processing the leading target, thus releasing resources for the trailing target. On the temporary-loss-of-control (TLC) hypothesis, intervening distractors disrupt the current attentional set, producing a trailing-target deficit. Identification accuracy for trailing targets was unimpaired not only at lag 1 (conventional lag 1 sparing) but also at later lags, if preceded by another target. The results supported the TLC hypothesis but not the resource-depletion hypothesis. We conclude that the AB is caused by a disruption in attentional set when a distractor is presented while the central executive is busy processing a leading target.
TL;DR: Findings do not support propositions that face identification is ”special” in its need for attentional control.
Abstract: How is attention allocated during face identification? Previous work using famous and unfamiliar faces suggests that either no attention or a special attentional mechanism is required. We used a conventional attentional blink (AB) procedure to measure face identification with temporarily reduced attention. The participants viewed a rapid series of face images with one embedded nonface abstract pattern (T1). They judged the texture of T1 and then detected a prespecified face (T2) presented at varying lags after T1. T2 was either famous or unfamiliar, as were distractor faces. Regardless of distractor type, detection of an unfamiliar T2 face was significantly impaired at short versus long T1-T2 lags, indicating an attentional requirement for face identification. Detection of a famous T2 face was unaffected by lag, suggesting that familiarity protects against a temporal attentional bottleneck. These findings do not support propositions that face identification is ”special” in its need for attentional control.
TL;DR: The present data suggest that identification facilitation for emotionally arousing target words in the AB is related to rapid enhancement of sensory processing, leading to facilitation at later stages of processing, including consolidation in working memory and visual awareness.
Abstract: Background: The present study aimed to investigate the time course of electrocortical facilitation for affectively arousing written words during the so-called 'attentional blink' (AB) period in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) task. The AB refers to a period of reduced awareness for secondtarget stimuli following a first target by an interval of about 200–500 ms. Pleasant, neutral, and unpleasant written verbs were used as second targets in an 8.6-Hz RSVP paradigm that contained affectively neutral words as distractors. Replicating and extending behavioral studies, we expected that emotional second targets would be associated with better identification accuracy and greater electrocortical activity, compared with neutral targets. Results: The steady-state visual evoked potential was recorded using 129 scalp electrodes. The time-varying energy at the presentation frequency of 8.6 Hz was extracted as a continuous measure of electrocortical activity related to the RSVP stream. Behavioral data showed that at an intertarget interval of 232 ms, the report for emotionally arousing (pleasant and unpleasant) words was more accurate than for neutral control words. This result was mirrored by the electrocortical response at posterior sensors, which showed rapid amplitude enhancement (120–270 ms after T2 onset) for pleasant and unpleasant targets specifically. Conclusion: The present data suggest that identification facilitation for emotionally arousing target words in the AB is related to rapid enhancement of sensory processing. Affectively arousing information is preferentially selected at the level of early perceptual analysis, leading to facilitation at later stages of processing, including consolidation in working memory and visual awareness.
TL;DR: Five experiments, in which three sequential targets were inserted in a stream of distractors, showed that identification accuracy for the leading target depended on an attentional switch whose magnitude varied with distractor–target similarity, in contrast, Accuracy for the trailing targets depended on similarity between the target and the trailing mask.
Abstract: Identification of the second of two targets is impaired if it is presented less than about 500 ms after the first. Three models of this second-target deficit, known as attentional blink (AB), were compared: resource-depletion, bottleneck, and temporary loss of control (TLC). Five experiments, in which three sequential targets were inserted in a stream of distractors, showed that identification accuracy for the leading target depended on an attentional switch whose magnitude varied with distractor-target similarity. In contrast, accuracy for the trailing target depended on similarity between the target and the trailing mask. These results strongly suggest that the AB is not a unitary phenomenon. Resource-depletion was ruled out as a viable account. The effect of attentional switching was handled naturally by the TLC model, while bottleneck models offered the best account of the effect of backward masking.
TL;DR: Clear effects on motoric inhibition but not attentional inhibition in adults with ADHD are demonstrated, similar to previous findings of extended latencies and increased anticipatory saccades in ADHD.
Abstract: Faulty inhibition is theorized to be a central feature in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but it remains unclear whether inhibitory impairments encompass both motoric and attentional domains. Further, characterization of inhibitory deficits in adults with ADHD is needed. We experimentally assessed adults who met diagnostic criteria for ADHD and a subgroup who had partially remitted. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) subtype effects were also examined. Motoric inhibition was assessed with the antisaccade task, and attentional inhibition was assessed with the attentional blink (AB) task. Antisaccade results replicated prior findings of extended latencies and increased anticipatory saccades in ADHD. Errors, however, appeared to be epiphenomenal to ADHD as they were absent when symptoms had partially remitted. Anticipatory saccades appeared as potential core problems that remained even when symptoms had improved. Differential response patterns were found for predominantly inattentive and combined subtypes, with the latter showing increasing anticipatory movements with increasing fixation time. In the AB task, ADHD groups committed more errors but showed no convincing evidence of an abnormal blink. These results demonstrate clear effects on motoric inhibition but not attentional inhibition in adults with ADHD.
TL;DR: The AB can be triggered by a highlighted distractor if the distractor shares features with a target, and it is found that attention directed to a distractor during rapid serial visual presentation can produce an attentional blink.
Abstract: Two experiments examined the possibility that attention directed to a distractor during rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) can produce an attentional blink (AB). A to-be-ignored distractor (D1) preceded a target word (T2) by a variable lag in RSVP streams of black false-font distractors. D1 was highlighted by color and was a word, a string of consonants, a string of digits, or a string of false-font characters. Recall of T2 was significantly suppressed at short D1-T2 lags (the AB) but only when D1 contained letters; the AB was completely absent when D1 was composed of digits or false-font characters. Thus, the AB can be triggered by a highlighted distractor if the distractor shares features with a target.
TL;DR: The results suggest a benefit of both general alerting and cross-modal spatial integration on visual search efficiency, and the most significant improvement occurred when the target and tone were both presented in contralesional space.
Abstract: Recent studies indicate that auditory tone presentation and auditory alerting can temporarily ameliorate visuospatial attention deficits in patients with unilateral neglect [Frassinetti, F., Pavani, F., & Ladavas, E. Acoustical vision of neglected stimuli: Interaction among spatially converging audiovisual inputs in neglect patients. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 62--69, 2002; Robertson, I. H., Mattingley, J. B., Rorden, C., & Driver, J. Phasic alerting of neglect patients overcomes their spatial deficit in visual awareness. Nature, 395, 169--172, 1998]. The current study investigated proposed mechanisms of cross-modal interaction to determine conditions in which auditory stimulation affects spatial and nonspatially lateralized attention deficits in a patient with hemispatial neglect. In Experiment 1, a target was presented among related distracters (conjunction search) while a tone was presented either bilaterally or in a congruent or incongruent spatial location with respect to the visual target. Whereas the results suggest a benefit of both general alerting and cross-modal spatial integration on visual search efficiency, the most significant improvement occurred when the target and tone were both presented in contralesional space. In Experiment 2, the effect of auditory alerting on selective attention was examined in a rapid serial visual search procedure with visual targets embedded in a stream of distracters presented at central fixation. When two targets were presented without an alerting tone, the patient missed the second target for up to 1000 msec after the first target appeared (a finding known as the “attentional blink” [AB] and, on average, about 400--500 msec in normals). An alerting tone presented at a fixed temporal location significantly reduced the AB in a tone-duration-dependent manner. Experiment 3 examined the effect of cross-modal space on selective attention in an AB paradigm in which T2 occurred randomly to the left or right of T1 with a spatially congruent or incongruent tone. Discrimination of T2 in contralesional space significantly improved when the tone was presented in the same location, and was impaired when the tone was presented on the ipsilesional side. The findings are discussed as they relate to cross-modal interactions and their influence on spatial and nonspatially lateralized attention deficits in neglect.
TL;DR: Overall, the P3 elicited by T1 was greater when T2 was not identified than when it was, and the correlation between P3 and AB magnitude across participants was not significant, leaving open the question of how direct the relationship between the P2 and the AB is.
TL;DR: The authors conclude that the selection of targets from a rapid serial visual presentation stream is mediated by both excitatory and inhibitory attentional control mechanisms.
Abstract: The attentional blink refers to the finding that the 2nd of 2 targets embedded in a stream of rapidly presented distractors is often missed. Whereas most theories of the attentional blink focus on limited-capacity processes that occur after target selection, the present work investigates the selection process itself. Identifying a target letter caused an attentional blink for the enumeration of subsequent dot patterns, but this blink was reduced when the dots shared their color with the target letter. In contrast, performance worsened when the color of the dots matched that of the remaining distractors in the stream. Similarity between the targets also affected competition between different sets of dots presented simultaneously within a single display. The authors conclude that the selection of targets from a rapid serial visual presentation stream is mediated by both excitatory and inhibitory attentional control mechanisms.
TL;DR: A parallel was drawn between the AB deficit and the deficit observed in attentional capture, which can be explained on the basis of a hybrid input-filtering model in which endogenous and exogenous factors are subserved by different pathways.
Abstract: Identification of the second of two targets is impaired if it is presented less than about 500 msec after the first. Thisattentional blink (AB) occurs under dual-task conditions in which observers are required to report both targets. AB magnitude has been estimated by subtracting the accuracy scores in the dual task from the corresponding scores in a single task in which observers are instructed to ignore the first target. Experiment 1 showed this procedure to be inappropriate, because the first target cannot be ignored. The remaining three experiments elaborated on this finding and revealed separate endogenous and exogenous sources of the second-target deficit. A parallel was drawn between the AB deficit and the deficit observed in attentional capture. Both types of deficit can be explained on the basis of a hybrid input-filtering model in which endogenous and exogenous factors are subserved by different pathways.
TL;DR: Interference between successive target stimuli in visual and auditory modalities is studied to conclude that restrictions in concurrent target identification are largely modality specific.
Abstract: Following up on studies of the “attentional blink,” we studied interference between successive target stimuli in visual and auditory modalities. In each experiment, stimuli were two tones and four dots, simultaneously presented for 1,800 msec. Targets were brief intensity changes in either a tone or a dot. Subjects gave unspeeded responses. In four experiments, our results showed interference between targets in the same modality, but not across modalities. We conclude that, under our experimental conditions, restrictions in concurrent target identification are largely modality specific.
TL;DR: The results suggest that individual differences in AB magnitude do not result from differences in effective RSVP target encoding and are not well explained by varied information-processing abilities.
Abstract: When two masked, to-be-attended targets are presented within approximately half a second of each other, performance on the second target (T2) suffers, relative to when the targets are presented further apart in time or when the first target (T1) can be ignored. This pattern of results is known as the attentional blink (AB). Typically, participants differ with respect to the magnitude of their AB and their overall target accuracy. Despite investigations as to what participant characteristics may influence AB performance (e.g., age, brain damage, or mood state), there has been no focused examination of whether individual differences in cognitive performance measures predict the magnitude of the AB or overall rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) target accuracy. Our university student participants performed single-target and dual-target RSVP tasks, as well as a selection of cognitive tasks that did not use RSVP presentations, with color, letter, digit, and object stimuli. Overall performance on each of the RSVP targets (T1, T2, and single target) was predicted by speeded manual and vocal identification times to isolated stimuli and by performance with other RSVP targets. However, the magnitude of the AB was predicted only by T1 accuracy, not by any other performance measures. The results suggest that individual differences in AB magnitude do not result from differences in effective RSVP target encoding and are not well explained by varied information-processing abilities.
TL;DR: The results suggest that the auditory AB is affected both by the overwriting of the probe by the distractor following it and by a reduction in discriminability generated by all of the distractors presented in the sequence.
Abstract: Four experiments were conducted to determine whether or not the presence and placement of distractors in a rapid serial auditory stream has any influence on the emergence of the auditory attentional blink (AB). Experiment 1 revealed that the presence of distractors is necessary to produce the auditory AB. In Experiments 2 and 3, the auditory AB was reduced when the distractor immediately following the probe was replaced by silence but not when the distractor following the target was replaced by silence. Finally, in Experiment 4, only a very small auditory AB was found to remain when all distractors following the probe were replaced by silence. These results suggest that the auditory AB is affected both by the overwriting of the probe by the distractors following it and by a reduction in discriminability generated by all of the distractors presented in the sequence.
TL;DR: Results suggest that the working memory consolidation bottleneck is amodal in nature, and provide evidence that visual, auditory, and cross-modality ABs all result from a bottleneck on consolidation operations.
Abstract: When two masked, attended targets (T1 and T2) are presented within approximately half a second of each other, report of T2 is poor, compared with when the targets are presented farther apart in time—a phenomenon known as the attentional blink (AB; Raymond, Shapiro, & Arnell, 1992). Some researchers have suggested that an amodal bottleneck on working memory consolidation underlies the AB (see, e.g., Arnell & Jolicoeur, 1999). In the present work, T1 was masked, whereas T2 was unmasked. The modality of T1 (visual or auditory) and the modality of T2 (visual or auditory) were factorially manipulated across four experiments. For all modality combinations, T2's P3 event-related brain potential component was found to be delayed when T2 was presented soon after T1 (lag 3), compared with when T1 and T2 were presented farther apart (lag 8). Results suggest that the working memory consolidation bottleneck is amodal in nature, and provide evidence that visual, auditory, and cross-modality ABs all result from a bottleneck on consolidation operations.
TL;DR: The results suggest that the visual system can handle up to four items at one moment under RSVP circumstances, and that lag-1 sparing occurred concurrently in both streams.
Abstract: When two targets (T1 and T2) are inserted in a rapid stream of visual distractors (RSVP), detection/ identification accuracy of T2 is impaired at intertarget lags shorter than about 500 msec. This phenomenon, the attentional blink (AB), has been regarded as a hallmark of the inability of the visual system to process multiple items. Yet, paradoxically, the AB is much reduced when T2 is presented directly after T1 (known aslag-1 sparing). Because lag-1 sparing is said to depend on observers’ spatial attention being set to process the first target, we predicted that if observers are set to monitor two RSVP streams, they could process more than two items; that is, two instances of lag-1 sparing would be obtained concurrently. The results of three experiments indicated that this was the case. When observers searched for two targets in each of two synchronized RSVP streams, lag-1 sparing occurred concurrently in both streams. These results suggest that the visual system can handle up to four items at one moment under RSVP circumstances.
TL;DR: The findings suggest that the enhanced AB effect in schizophrenia reflects an abnormality in their short term visual memory, as opposed to their enhanced susceptibility to visual masking.
TL;DR: A method to quantify four characteristics of the AB curve: the minimum performance, the amplitude between the minimum and the asymptotic performance,The amount of Lag-1 sparing, and the width of the effect is proposed.
Abstract: The attentional blink effect (AB) is used to examine the limits of attention in dual-task paradigms. However, since the effect is nonlinear, it is sometimes difficult to characterize the results. Furthermore, it is difficult to assess the significance of the effect between groups because the results are highly variable both within and across subjects. In this paper, we propose a method to quantify four characteristics of the AB curve: the minimum performance, the amplitude between the minimum and the asymptotic performance, the amount of Lag-1 sparing, and the width of the effect. The method, based on curve fitting, allows easier compar- isons of the results across experiments, can test only one characteristic at a time, and yields more powerful statistical tests.
TL;DR: In this paper, various STM operations are tested for their impact on performance and, in particular, on the attentional blink (AB), and the emerging picture is that STM resources or their lack play no role in the AB.
Abstract: Short-term memory (STM) has often been considered to be a central resource in cognition. This study addresses its role in rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) tasks tapping into temporal attention *the attentional blink (AB). Various STM operations are tested for their impact on performance and, in particular, on the AB. Memory tasks were found to exert considerable impact on general performance but the size of the AB was more or less immune to manipulations of STM load. Likewise, the AB was unaffected by manipulating the match between items held in STM and targets or temporally close distractors in the RSVP stream. The emerging picture is that STM resources, or their lack, play no role in the AB. Alternative accounts assuming serial consolidation, selection for action, and distractor-induced task-set interference are discussed.