Research on Computer-Generated Force Perceptual Attention

Author(s):  
Jinhui Zhao ◽  
Weilong Yang ◽  
Yanqing Ye ◽  
Xu Xie
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Jonardon Ganeri

Conscious attention performs two distinct roles in experience, a role of placing and a role of focusing, roles which match a distinction between selection and access endorsed in recent theories of attention. The intentionality of conscious experience consists in two sorts of attentional action, a focusing at and a placing on, the first lending to experience a perspectival categorical content and the second structuring its phenomenal character. Placing should be thought of more like opening a window for consciousness than as shining a spotlight, and focusing has to do with accessing the properties of whatever the window opens onto. A window is an aperture whose boundaries are defined by what is excluded—in this case, distractors.


2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Cagnoli Fiecconi

Abstract I argue that a study of the Nicomachean Ethics and of the Parva Naturalia shows that Aristotle had a notion of attention. This notion captures the common aspects of apparently different phenomena like perceiving something vividly, being distracted by a loud sound or by a musical piece, focusing on a geometrical problem. For Aristotle, these phenomena involve a specific selectivity that is the outcome of the competition between different cognitive stimuli. This selectivity is attention. I argue that Aristotle studied the common aspects of the physiological processes at the basis of attention and its connection with pleasure. His notion can explain perceptual attention and intellectual attention as voluntary or involuntary phenomena. In addition, it sheds light on how attention and enjoyment can enhance our cognitive activities.


1985 ◽  
Vol 78 (S1) ◽  
pp. S83-S83
Author(s):  
Howard C. Nusbaum ◽  
Steven L. Greenspan ◽  
David B. Pisoni

1999 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 390-391
Author(s):  
Gillian Rhodes ◽  
Michael L. Kalish

How can the impenetrability hypothesis be empirically tested? We comment on the role of signal detection measures, suggesting that context effects on discriminations for which post-perceptual cues are irrelevant, or on neural activity associated with early vision, would challenge impenetrability. We also note the great computational power of the proposed pre-perceptual attention processes and consider the implications for testability of the theory.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Haneen Alsuradi ◽  
Wanjoo Park ◽  
Mohamad Eid

AbstractHaptic technologies aim to simulate tactile or kinesthetic interactions with a physical or virtual environment in order to enhance user experience and/or performance. However, due to stringent communication and computational needs, the user experience is influenced by delayed haptic feedback. While delayed feedback is well understood in the visual and auditory modalities, little research has systematically examined the neural correlates associated with delayed haptic feedback. In this paper, we used electroencephalography (EEG) to study sensory and cognitive neural correlates caused by haptic delay during passive and active tasks performed using a haptic device and a computer screen. Results revealed that theta power oscillation was significantly higher at the midfrontal cortex under the presence of haptic delay. Sensory correlates represented by beta rebound were found to be similar in the passive task and different in the active task under the delayed and synchronous conditions. Additionally, the event related potential (ERP) P200 component is modulated under the haptic delay condition during the passive task. The P200 amplitude significantly reduced in the last 20% of trials during the passive task and in the absence of haptic delay. Results suggest that haptic delay could be associated with increased cognitive control processes including multi-sensory divided attention followed by conflict detection and resolution with an earlier detection during the active task. Additionally, haptic delay tends to generate greater perceptual attention that does not significantly decay across trials during the passive task.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 775-788
Author(s):  
Mark Fortney

Remembering that there’s a difference between intellectual and perceptual attention can help us avoid miscommunication due to meaning different things by the same terms, which has been a particular problem during the last hundred years or so of the study of attention. I demonstrate this through analyzing in depth one such miscommunication that occurred in a philosophical criticism of the influential psychological text, Inattentional Blindness. But after making the distinction between perceptual attention and intellectual attention, and after making an effort to keep this distinction in mind, we are still faced with the problem of specifying what makes intellectual attention distinct from perceptual attention. In the second half of this article, I discuss the range of proposals about how to understand intellectual attention that are present in the literature, and the problems with them. I do this with the aim of stimulating further discussion about how best to conceptualize intellectual attention, although I do not settle that further question within this paper.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document