Attentional blink

About: Attentional blink is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1346 publications have been published within this topic receiving 53064 citations. The topic is also known as: Attentional blinks.

Eye Movements and Practice Effects in the Attentional Dwell Time Paradigm

Abstract: In the attentional dwell time paradigm by Duncan, Ward, and Shapiro (1994), two backward masked targets are presented at different spatial locations and separated by a varying time interval. Results show that report of the second target is severely impaired when the time interval is less than 500 ms which has been taken as a direct measure of attentional dwell time in human vision. However, we show that eye movements may have confounded the estimate of the dwell time and that the measure may not be robust as previously suggested. The latter is supported by evidence suggesting that intensive training strongly attenuates the dwell time because of habituation to the masks. Thus, this article points to eye movements and masking as two potential methodological pitfalls that should be considered when using the attentional dwell time paradigm to investigate the temporal dynamics of attention.

Voluntary triggering of the first target attenuates the attentional blink.

Abstract: The term attentional blink (AB) refers to a failure in identifying the second of two targets, separated by less than 500 ms, embedded in a rapid succession of nontargets. To examine whether the expectation of the onset of the first target affects the AB, we compared the magnitudes of the AB deficit when participants triggered the appearance of the first target and when the target was presented automatically at some time point, as in traditional AB studies. In Experiment 1, the first target appeared immediately after a participant’s voluntary keypress, revealing that the accuracy for identifying the first target increased and that the AB deficit was attenuated. In Experiment 2, the temporal delay between a voluntary keypress and the first-target presentation was manipulated. The results showed that both targets could be reported accurately only when the first target was presented within 300 ms after the action. In Experiment 3, we ruled out an alternative explanation that would attribute the facilitation effect to mere physical movement, by examining the accuracy of target identification when participants voluntarily pressed a key but that action was unrelated to the onset of the first target. Taken together, the results suggest that voluntary action to trigger the onset of a visual target facilitates processing and reduces the subsequent AB deficit when the target appears within 300 ms of the action.

Distractor Detection and Suppression Have a Beneficial Effect on Attentional Blink

Abstract: Background Attentional blink (AB) is a phenomenon that describes the difficulty individuals have in reporting the second of two masked targets if the second target (T2) arrives 200–500 ms after the first target (T1). Recent studies explain the AB from cognitive resources limitation to distractors interference. For example, the temporary loss of control (TLC) hypothesis suggests that the AB is conduced by distractors disrupting the input filter for target processing. The inhibition models suggest that the T1+1 distractor triggers a suppression mechanism which could be beneficial for T1 processing but would suppress T2 at short T1–T2 lags. These models consider that the AB is caused by the appearance of distractors. However, in the present study, two methods were taken to help individuals to detect the distractors more effectively. An attenuated AB deficit was found when the distractors could be excluded or suppressed in time. We consider that under an appropriate condition the distractors detection and suppression have a beneficial effect on attentional blink. Methodology/Principal Findings Two methods were employed to help individuals to detect the distractors more effectively: enlarging the low-level-physical characteristic difference between targets and distractors (Experiment 1) and restricting the sets of distractors (Experiment 2). Attenuated AB deficits were found as using the above manipulations. Conclusions/Significance The present study found when the distractors are detected or identified quickly, they could be effectively suppressed, in order to reduce the interference from the targets and result in a smaller AB deficit. We suggest that the suppression mechanism for distractors have a beneficial effect on AB.