Early Modulation of Visual Input: A Study of Attentional Strategies

Despite agreement among many attentional theories that processing resources are limited and allocated according to task demands, controversy continues about the locus of selectivity. Studies of spatial orientation of attention suggest an early effect. These results, however, can be explained instead by effects of decision processes. The present study avoids this difficulty by directly manipulating attention in a dual-task paradigm and by using SDT to dissociate sensory tuning from criterion shifts. Ten subjects judged whether two lines to the left of fixation were the same or different in length; they also judged two lines presented simultaneously to the right. In a given block of 64 trials, the subject was to allocate 80%, 50%, or 20% of attention to one pair of lines and the rest to the other. On every trial, the subject judged both pairs. Results showed that d′ increased from 0.77 with 20% allocation to 1.69 with 80%, indicating that sensitivity is modulated by attentional instructions. These results are predicted quantitatively by Luce's sample-size model.

[1]  John Duncan,et al.  The demonstration of capacity limitation , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[2]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. , 1977 .

[3]  J. Deutsch.  Perception and Communication , 1958, Nature.

[4]  E R Hafter,et al.  Uncertain-frequency detection: Cuing and condition of observation , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

[5]  Daniel Gopher,et al.  On the Economy of the Human Processing System: A Model of Multiple Capacity. , 1977 .

[6]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Attention and Effort , 1973 .

[7]  James P. Egan,et al.  PSYCHOPHYSICS AND SIGNAL DETECTION. , 1962 .

[8]  H. Woodrow.  The measurement of attention , 1914 .

[9]  Howard S. Bashinski,et al.  Enhancement of perceptual sensitivity as the result of selectively attending to spatial locations , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

[10]  D. Norman.  Toward a theory of memory and attention. , 1968 .

[11]  D. Homa,et al.  Sensitization of the visual field. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  P. H. Lindsay,et al.  Quantification of shared capacity processing in auditory and visual discrimination. , 1967, Acta psychologica.

[13]  D. Dorfman,et al.  Maximum-likelihood estimation of parameters of signal-detection theory and determination of confidence intervals—Rating-method data , 1969 .

[14]  C. Possamaï.  [Spatial orientation of attention: results and theories]. , 1986, Canadian journal of psychology.

[15]  Thomas H. Carr,et al.  Perceptual tuning and conscious attention: Systems of input regulation in visual information processing , 1976, Cognition.

[16]  J E Hoffman,et al.  Search through a sequentially presented visual display , 1978, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[18]  M. Shaw,et al.  Optimal allocation of cognitive resources to spatial locations. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[19]  J E Hoffman,et al.  A two-stage model of visual search , 1979, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  M. Posner,et al.  Components of visual orienting , 1984 .

[21]  Don McNicol,et al.  A Primer of Signal Detection Theory , 1976 .

[22]  K. Heilman,et al.  Mechanisms underlying hemispatial neglect , 1979, Annals of neurology.

[23]  Wayne A. Wickelgren,et al.  Speed-accuracy tradeoff and information processing dynamics , 1977 .

[24]  M. Posner,et al.  Attention and the detection of signals. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology.

[25]  Marilyn L. Shaw,et al.  A capacity allocation model for reaction time. , 1978 .

[26]  William C. Ogden,et al.  Attended and unattended processing modes: The role of set for spatial location , 2014 .

[27]  Robert G Pachella,et al.  The Interpretation of Reaction Time in Information-Processing Research 1 , 1973, Human Information Processing.

[28]  R. A. Kinchla,et al.  Detecting target elements in multielement arrays: A confusability model , 1974 .

[29]  M. Posner,et al.  Orienting of Attention* , 1980, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[30]  David M. Greem,et al.  Variability of magnitude estimates: A timing theory analysis , 1974 .

[31]  N A Macmillan,et al.  Detection theory analysis of group data: estimating sensitivity from average hit and false-alarm rates. , 1985, Psychological bulletin.

[32]  J. Deutsch,et al.  Attention: Some theoretical considerations. , 1963 .

[33]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Thurstone's discriminal processes fifty years later , 1977 .

[34]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Rate of information processing in visual perception: some results and methodological considerations. , 1969, Journal of experimental psychology.

[35]  G Sperling,et al.  The attention operating characteristic: examples from visual search. , 1978, Science.

[36]  Joseph S. Lappin,et al.  Does prior knowledge facilitate the detection of visual targets in random noise? , 1976 .

[37]  Daniel G Bobrow,et al.  On data-limited and resource-limited processes , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[38]  Camille-Aime Possamai,et al.  SEREX2: A program to generate exhaustive series , 1974 .

[39]  David E. Anderson.  PSYCHO-STATS PC: A statistical package for the IBM PC , 1984 .

[40]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Allocation of attention in the visual field. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.