Global and local attention in the attentional blink.

This study examines the attentional blink (AB) under conditions where attention was directed either to the overall (global) or to the component (local) form of compound Navon letters. Forty-five adult participants were presented RSVP sequences of compound letter stimuli and were asked to identify the prescribed attentional aspect of a red target letter (T1) and to detect the presence of a second item (T2 = letter X), again of specified global or local aspect. Trials were presented at either four or six letter forms per second (f/s). We report that the AB estimated from the mean performance across participants is much longer (1.5-2.5 s) than that reported previously with single letter RSVP (200-500 ms). A lag-1 sparing effect was not observed when data were filtered for correct identification of T1. Characteristic rapid (initial) and slower (later) recovery phases suggested the use of a bilinear ("knee") recovery model, possibly identifying a novel slow recovery mechanism for the AB when its duration is sufficiently long. However, it is proposed that the duration of the AB should be analyzed by estimation of each individual's AB prior to group analysis. Analysis of individual bilinear fits to the data shows a significant effect of attentional condition for the 4 f/s data, with more rapid recovery for Global-Global (GG) than Local-Local (LL) target conditions, consistent with the global precedence hypothesis. While the 6 f/s data did not demonstrate such differences between attentional conditions, it was at the expense of T1 identification performance with significantly poorer T1 identification for the LL cf GG conditions. Individual fits also demonstrate that the later slow recovery phase seen in the population mean data is clearly a result of pooling of the data from individuals reaching ceiling performance in recovery at different times. Analysis of the trials in which T1 was incorrectly identified yielded an attentional blink for T2 with delayed recovery and a manifest lag-1 sparing effect. This suggests, in the framework of the two stage model, that the duration of gate opening for target recognition requires sufficient certainty of recognition prior to closure, rather than being a fixed, process-related time.

[1]  J. Polich,et al.  Hemispheric local/global processing revisited. , 1990, Acta psychologica.

[2]  E. Vogel,et al.  Electrophysiological Evidence for a Postperceptual Locus of Suppression during the Attentional Blink Time-based Attention and the Attentional Blink , 1998 .

[3]  Y. Zhuo,et al.  On the Different Processing of Wholes and Parts: A Psychophysiological Analysis , 1997, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[4]  R Kimchi,et al.  Hemispheric processing of global form, local form, and texture. , 1991, Acta psychologica.

[5]  M. Potter,et al.  A two-stage model for multiple target detection in rapid serial visual presentation. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[6]  E. Vogel,et al.  Word meanings can be accessed but not reported during the attentional blink , 1996, Nature.

[7]  J. Duncan,et al.  The Slow Time-Course of Visual Attention , 1996, Cognitive Psychology.

[8]  T. Stoffer,et al.  The time course of attentional zooming: A comparison of voluntary and involuntary allocation of attention to the levels of compound stimuli , 1993, Psychological research.

[9]  Ichiro Fujita,et al.  Attentional modulation of neural activity in the macaque inferior temporal cortex during global and local processing , 2001, Neuroscience Research.

[10]  D. Navon.  Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception , 1977, Cognitive Psychology.

[11]  J. Braun.  Vision and attention: the role of training , 1998, Nature.

[12]  M C Potter,et al.  Two attentional deficits in serial target search: the visual attentional blink and an amodal task-switch deficit. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[13]  Pierre Jolicœur,et al.  Beyond Task 1 difficulty: The duration of T1 encoding modulates the attentional blink , 2007 .

[14]  Carmel Mevorach,et al.  Opposite biases in salience-based selection for the left and right posterior parietal cortex , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.

[15]  D. Broadbent,et al.  From detection to identification: Response to multiple targets in rapid serial visual presentation , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  Processing deficits in RSVP : the attentional blink and repetition blindness , 1994 .

[17]  Failure to identify the target does not prevent the attentional blink effect , 2000, Neuroreport.

[18]  V. Lollo,et al.  The attentional blink with targets in different spatial locations , 1999, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[19]  E. Wascher,et al.  Shifting attention between global features and small details: an event-related potential study , 1997, Biological Psychology.

[20]  J. R. Pomerantz.  Global and local precedence: selective attention in form and motion perception. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[21]  Richard S. J. Frackowiak,et al.  Where in the brain does visual attention select the forest and the trees? , 1996, Nature.

[22]  P. Kiely,et al.  Changes in ocular accommodation when shifting between global and local attention , 2005, Clinical & experimental optometry.

[23]  K. Shapiro.  The Attentional Blink: The Brain's “Eyeblink” , 1994 .

[24]  P. Jolicoeur,et al.  Selective influence of second target exposure duration and Task1 load effects in the attentional blink phenomenon , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[25]  P. Jolicoeur.  Modulation of the attentional blink by on-line response selection: Evidence from speeded and unspeeded Task1 decisions , 1998, Memory & cognition.

[26]  G. Mangun,et al.  Neural Mechanisms of Global and Local Processing: A Combined PET and ERP Study , 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[27]  D. Navon,et al.  Testing a queue hypothesis for the processing of global and local information. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[28]  Attentional blink in global versus local attentional modes. , 1998, Australian and New Zealand journal of ophthalmology.

[29]  Karen M. Arnell,et al.  Revisiting within-modality and cross-modality attentional blinks: Effects of target—distractor similarity , 2004, Perception & psychophysics.

[30]  H. Egeth,et al.  Beyond similarity: Masking of the target is sufficient to cause the attentional blink , 1997, Perception & psychophysics.

[31]  Karen M. Arnell,et al.  Attention to visual pattern information produces the attentional blink in rapid serial visual presentation. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[32]  Pierre Jolickur.  Concurrent Response-Selection Demands Modulate the Attentional Blink , 1999 .

[33]  M. J. Blanca,et al.  Hemispheric differences in global and local processing dependent on exposure duration , 1994, Neuropsychologia.

[34]  C. Koch,et al.  The duration of the attentional blink in natural scenes depends on stimulus category , 2007, Vision Research.

[35]  S. Rapcsak,et al.  Hierarchical Stimuli and Hemispheric Specialization: Two Case Studies , 1994, Cortex.

[36]  H. Heinze,et al.  Electrophysiological correlates of hierarchical stimulus processing: Dissociation between onset and later stages of global and local target processing , 1993, Neuropsychologia.

[37]  K L Shapiro,et al.  Similarity determines the attentional blink. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[38]  R. Job,et al.  New evidence for the perceptual precedence of global information. , 1991, Acta psychologica.

[39]  Sabrina Fagioli,et al.  Switching between goals mediates the attentional blink effect. , 2007, Experimental psychology.

[40]  R. Knight,et al.  Normal global-local analysis in patients with dorsolateral frontal lobe lesions , 1991, Neuropsychologia.

[41]  K L Shapiro,et al.  Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: an attentional blink? . , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[42]  J. Driver,et al.  Priming from the Attentional Blink: A Failure to Extract Visual Tokens but Not Visual Types , 1997 .