The time it takes to switch attention

An experiment is reported that measured the time it takes to switch attention from one set of locations to another in response to a cue that indicates the relevant locations. The experiment compared sequences of trials in which the same locations were cued in succession with sequences in which different locations were cued in succession in order to separate cue-encoding time from attention-switching time. Same-location sequences require cue encoding but not attention switching. They were substantially faster than different-location sequences, which require both cue encoding and attention switching. Formal models were fitted to time-course functions generated by presenting the cues 0, 100, 200, 300, or 400 msec before the target displays. The model fits suggest that cue encoding took 67–74 msec and attention switching took 76–101 msec.

[1]  H. Pashler,et al.  Evidence for split attentional foci. , 2000, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.

[2]  R. D. Gordon,et al.  Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. , 2001, Psychological review.

[3]  J. Wolfe,et al.  What Can 1 Million Trials Tell Us About Visual Search? , 1998 .

[4]  G. Sperling,et al.  Episodic theory of the dynamics of spatial attention. , 1995 .

[5]  J. Jonides,et al.  Rehearsal in spatial working memory. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[6]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Temporal course of selective attention. , 1969, Journal of experimental psychology.

[7]  C. Bundesen.  A theory of visual attention. , 1990, Psychological review.

[8]  Z W Pylyshyn,et al.  Tracking multiple independent targets: evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. , 1988, Spatial vision.

[9]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Selective encoding from multielement visual displays , 1973 .

[10]  Z. Pylyshyn.  The role of location indexes in spatial perception: A sketch of the FINST spatial-index model , 1989, Cognition.

[11]  J. Townsend.  Serial vs. Parallel Processing: Sometimes They Look like Tweedledum and Tweedledee but they can (and Should) be Distinguished , 1990 .

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

[13]  Y. Tsal.  Movements of attention across the visual field. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  A. Treisman.  Perceptual grouping and attention in visual search for features and for objects. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  G. Logan,et al.  Clever homunculus: is there an endogenous act of control in the explicit task-cuing procedure? , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  R. Kliegl,et al.  Differential effects of cue changes and task changes on task-set selection costs. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[17]  N. Cowan.  The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[18]  Claus Bundesen,et al.  Very clever homunculus: Compound stimulus strategies for the explicit task-cuing procedure , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[19]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Temporal and spatial characteristics of selective encoding from visual displays , 1972 .

[20]  A. Kramer,et al.  Splitting the Beam: Distribution of Attention Over Noncontiguous Regions of the Visual Field , 1995 .

[21]  Gordon D Logan,et al.  An instance theory of attention and memory. , 2002, Psychological review.

[22]  H. Egeth,et al.  Are attentional dwell times inconsistent with serial visual search? , 1996, Psychonomic bulletin & review.