Object-based attentional selection and aging.

The authors conducted 2 studies to examine potential age-related differences in object-based attentional selection. Participants were briefly presented with pairs of wrenches and were asked to make 1 response if both target properties (i.e., an open end and a hexagonal end) were present and another response if only a single target property was present in the display. The critical manipulation was whether the target properties were present on 1 wrench or distributed between 2 wrenches. Space-based models of selective attention predict no difference in performance between these conditions. However, object-based attentional selection models predict better performance when both target properties appear on a single object. The results from both of the studies were consistent with object-based models of attentional selection. Furthermore, both young and old adults showed similar performance effects, suggesting the object-based attentional selection is insensitive to normal aging.

[1]  D. Madden,et al.  Adult age differences in attentional allocation during memory search. , 1992, Psychology and aging.

[2]  G. Logan,et al.  Converging operations in the study of visual selective attention , 1996 .

[3]  W. Hoyer,et al.  Age and the selectivity of visual information processing. , 1986, Psychology and aging.

[4]  J. Cerella,et al.  Adult information processing: Limits on loss. , 1993 .

[5]  D. Plude,et al.  Aging, selective attention, and feature integration. , 1989, Psychology and aging.

[6]  Jon Driver,et al.  Spreading of Visual Attention to Modally Versus Amodally Completed Regions , 1997 .

[7]  S. E. Watson,et al.  Object-based visual selective attention and perceptual organization , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  Gregory A. Miller,et al.  Selective processing of superimposed objects: an electrophysiological analysis of object-based attentional selection , 1997, Biological Psychology.

[9]  S. Yantis.  Multielement visual tracking: Attention and perceptual organization , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[10]  A F Kramer,et al.  Object-based attentional selection--grouped arrays or spatially invariant representations?: comment on vecera and Farah (1994). , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[11]  G J Andersen,et al.  Focused attention in three-dimensional space , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[12]  D. Kahneman,et al.  The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[13]  A. Kramer,et al.  Perceptual organization and focused attention: The role of objects and proximity in visual processing , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  R. Rafal,et al.  Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[15]  J. Riddoch,et al.  13. Competitive mechanisms of selection by space and object: a neuropsychological approach , 1996 .

[16]  A F Kramer,et al.  Spatial cuing in a stereoscopic display: attention remains "depth-aware" with age. , 1998, The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences.

[17]  G. Baylis,et al.  Visual attention and objects: evidence for hierarchical coding of location. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  F. Royer,et al.  Aging and similarity grouping in visual search. , 1985, Journal of gerontology.

[19]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  C D Wickens,et al.  Processing of stimulus properties: evidence for dual-task integrality. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[22]  D. LaBerge,et al.  Theory of attentional operations in shape identification. , 1989 .