"The attentional blink reflects retrieval competition among multiple rapid serial visual presentation items: Tests of an interference model": Erratum.

2000 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 479-479
Author(s):  
Matthew I. Issac ◽  
Kimron L. Shapiro ◽  
Jesse Martin
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Blink ◽  
Rapid Serial Visual Presentation ◽  
Visual Presentation ◽  
Interference Model

Interruption of Late Visual Processing Causes an Attentional Blink

Perception ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 26 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 134-134
Author(s):  
A Ehrenstein ◽  
B G Breitmeyer ◽  
K K Pritchard ◽  
M Hiscock ◽  
J Crisan
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Blink ◽  
Rapid Serial Visual Presentation ◽  
Visual Processing ◽  
Visual Presentation ◽  
Masking Effect ◽  
Backward Masking ◽  
Spatially Distributed ◽  
Display Location

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.

Irrelevant Words Trigger an Attentional Blink

2010 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 301-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timo Stein ◽  
Jan Zwickel ◽  
Maria Kitzmantel ◽  
Johanna Ritter ◽  
Werner X. Schneider
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Blink ◽  
Rapid Serial Visual Presentation ◽  
Target Item ◽  
Target Identification ◽  
Visual Presentation ◽  
Distractor Word ◽  
Word Target ◽  
Feature Sharing ◽  
Irrelevant Word ◽  
Feature Overlap

It has been argued that salient distractor items displayed during rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) trigger an attentional blink (AB) when they share features with the target item. Here we demonstrate that salient distractor words induce an AB independently of feature overlap with the target. In two experiments a color-highlighted irrelevant word preceded a target by a variable lag in an RSVP series of false font strings. Target identification was reduced at short relative to long temporal lags between the distractor word and the target, irrespective of feature sharing with the distractor word. When the target shared features with the distractor word, target accuracy was reduced across all lags. Accordingly, feature sharing between the distractor word and the target did not amplify the AB, but had an additive effect on attentional capture by the distractor word.

scholarly journals Animals Do Not Induce or Reduce Attentional Blinking, But They Are Reported More Accurately in a Rapid Serial Visual Presentation Task

i-Perception ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 204166951773554 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Hagen ◽  
Bruno Laeng
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Blink ◽  
Rapid Serial Visual Presentation ◽  
Visual Presentation ◽  
Special Role ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Final Experiment ◽  
Animal Images ◽  
General Advantage

Evolutionary psychologists have suggested that modern humans have evolved to automatically direct their attention toward animal stimuli. Although this suggestion has found support in several attentional paradigms, it is not without controversy. Recently, a study employing methods customary to studying the attentional blink has shown inconclusive support for the prioritization of animals in attention. This showed an advantage for reporting animals as second targets within the typical window of the attentional blink, but it remained unclear whether this advantage was really due to a reduction of the attentional blink. We reassessed for the presence of a reduced attentional blink for animals compared with artifacts by using three disparate stimuli sets. A general advantage for animals was found but no indication of a reduction of the attentional blink for animals. There was no support for the prediction that animal distractors should lead to spontaneous inductions of attentional blinks when presented as critical distractors before single targets. Another experiment with single targets still showed that animals were reported more accurately than artifacts. A final experiment showed that when animals were first target, they did not generate stronger attentional blinks. In summary, we did find a general advantage for animal images in the rapid serial visual presentation task, but animal images did not either induce or reduce attentional blinks. This set of results is in line with conclusions from previous research showing no evidence for a special role of animals in attention.

scholarly journals Light Video Game Play is Associated with Enhanced Visual Processing of Rapid Serial Visual Presentation Targets

Perception ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina J. Howard ◽  
Robert Wilding ◽  
Duncan Guest
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Blink ◽  
Rapid Serial Visual Presentation ◽  
Video Game ◽  
Visual Processing ◽  
Visual Presentation ◽  
Correct Identification ◽  
Game Play ◽  
Video Game Play ◽  
Game Players ◽  
Attentional Tasks

There is mixed evidence that video game players (VGPs) may demonstrate better performance in perceptual and attentional tasks than non-VGPs (NVGPs). The rapid serial visual presentation task is one such case, where observers respond to two successive targets embedded within a stream of serially presented items. We tested light VGPs (LVGPs) and NVGPs on this task. LVGPs were better at correct identification of second targets whether they were also attempting to respond to the first target. This performance benefit seen for LVGPs suggests enhanced visual processing for briefly presented stimuli even with only very moderate game play. Observers were less accurate at discriminating the orientation of a second target within the stream if it occurred shortly after presentation of the first target, that is to say, they were subject to the attentional blink (AB). We find no evidence for any reduction in AB in LVGPs compared with NVGPs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document