Types and tokens in visual processing: A double dissociation between the attentional blink and repetition blindness.

Author(s):  
Marvin M. Chun
1997 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimron Shapiro ◽  
Jon Driver ◽  
Robert Ward ◽  
Robyn E. Sorensen

When people must detect several targets in a very rapid stream of successive visual events at the same location, detection of an initial target induces misses for subsequent targets within a brief period. This attentional blink may serve to prevent interruption of ongoing target processing by temporarily suppressing vision for subsequent stimuli. We examined the level at which the internal blink operates, specifically, whether it prevents early visual processing or prevents quite substantial processing from reaching awareness. Our data support the latter view. We observed priming from missed letter targets, benefiting detection of a subsequent target with the same identity but a different case. In a second study, we observed semantic priming from word targets that were missed during the blink. These results demonstrate that attentional gating within the blink operates only after substantial stimulus processing has already taken place. The results are discussed in terms of two forms of visual representation, namely, types and tokens.


Perception ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 26 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 134-134
Author(s):  
A Ehrenstein ◽  
B G Breitmeyer ◽  
K K Pritchard ◽  
M Hiscock ◽  
J Crisan

When the task is to detect two letter targets in a stream of non-letter (digit) distractors in rapid serial visual presentation, an attentional blink (AB; ie a deficit in the detection of a second target when it follows the first by approximately 100 – 500 ms) is often found to occur. In a series of four experiments with different numbers of display positions, with or without masking, we show that: (1) the AB, which occurs when all items are presented at the same display location, is reduced when targets and distractors are presented randomly dispersed over 4 or 9 adjacent locations; (2) the AB is reduced with the spatially distributed presentation even when backward masks are used in all possible stimulus locations and when the location of the next item in the sequence is predictable; (3) the AB is not due to either a location-specific forward or backward masking effect occurring at early levels in visual processing. We conclude that the AB is primarily a function of the interruption of late visual processing produced when the item following the first target occurs at the same location. It seems that, in order for the AB to occur, the item following the first target must be presented at the same location as that target so that it can serve both as a distractor and as a mask interrupting or interfering with late visual processing.


2002 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salvador Soto-Faraco ◽  
Charles Spence

We studied the attentional blink (AB) and the repetition blindness (RB) effects using an audio-visual presentation procedure designed to overcome several potential methodological confounds in previous cross-modal research. In Experiment 1, two target digits were embedded amongst letter distractors in two concurrent streams (one visual and the other auditory) presented from the same spatial location. Targets appeared in either modality unpredictably at different temporal lags, and the participants’ task was to recall the digits at the end of the trial. We evaluated both AB and RB for pairs of targets presented in either the same or different modalities. Under these conditions both AB and RB were observed in vision, AB but not RB was observed in audition, and there was no evidence of AB or RB cross-modally from audition to vision or vice versa. In Experiment 2, we further investigated the AB by including Lag 1 items and observed Lag 1 sparing, thus ruling out the possibility that the observed effects were due to perceptual and/or conceptual masking. Our results support a distinction between a modality-specific interference at the attentional selection stage and a modality-independent interference at later processing stages. They also provide a new dissociation between the AB and RB.


2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Balas ◽  
Jennifer L. Momsen

Plants, to many, are simply not as interesting as animals. Students typically prefer to study animals rather than plants and recall plants more poorly, and plants are underrepresented in the classroom. The observed paucity of interest for plants has been described as plant blindness, a term that is meant to encapsulate both the tendency to neglect plants in the environment and the lack of appreciation for plants’ functional roles. While the term plant blindness suggests a perceptual or attentional component to plant neglect, few studies have examined whether there are real differences in how plants and animals are perceived. Here, we use an established paradigm in visual cognition, the “attentional blink,” to compare the extent to which images of plants and animals capture attentional resources. We find that participants are better able to detect animals than plants in rapid image sequences and that visual attention has a different refractory period when a plant has been detected. These results suggest there are fundamental differences in how the visual system processes plants that may contribute to plant blindness. We discuss how perceptual and physiological constraints on visual processing may suggest useful strategies for characterizing and overcoming zoocentrism.


2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 336-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen M. Arnell ◽  
Kimron L. Shapiro

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 1415
Author(s):  
David Huber ◽  
Lucas Huszar

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document