T1 difficulty does not modulate the magnitude of the attentional blink.

Thomas M Spalek,Vincent Di Lollo,Hayley E P Lagroix

doi:10.1177/17470218211054750

Thomas M Spalek, Vincent Di Lollo + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218211054750

Copy DOI

Abstract

When the visual system is busy processing one stimulus, it has problems processing a subsequent stimulus if it arrives soon after the first. Laboratory studies of this second-stimulus impairment—known as attentional blink (AB)—have employed two targets (T1, T2) presented in rapid sequence, and have found identification accuracy to be nearly perfect for T1, but impaired for T2. It is commonly believed that the magnitude of the AB is related directly to the difficulty of T1: the greater the T1 difficulty, the larger the AB. A survey of the experimental literature disconfirms that belief showing it to have arisen from artificial constraints imposed by the 100% limit of the response scale. Removal of that constraint, either using reaction time (RT) instead of accuracy as the dependent measure, or in experiments in which the functions of T2 accuracy over lags do not converge to the limit of the response scale, reveals parallel functions for the easy-T1 and the hard-T1 conditions, consistent with the idea that T1 difficulty does not modulate AB magnitude. This finding is problematic for all, but the Boost and Bounce (B&B) and the Locus Coeruleus–Norepinephrine (LC–NE) theories in which T1 acts merely as a trigger for an eventual refractory period that leads to the failure to process T2, rendering T1 difficulty and its relationship to the AB an irrelevant consideration.

Highlights

Limitations in visual information processing are revealed by a phenomenon known as the attentional blink (AB)
When two targets (T1, T2) are inserted in a stream of distractors displayed in rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP), identification accuracy is nearly perfect for T1 but is substantially reduced for T2 (Raymond et al, 1992)
Having reviewed some relevant methodological issues, we examine the empirical support for the proposition that the difficulty of T1 modulates the magnitude of the AB

Summary

50 Measure of AB area Mx-Mn

In light of these inconsistencies, it seems appropriate to look for ways of distinguishing between the two methods, and to ask what criteria can be adopted for deciding between them. Because the two functions have the same slope, the MAX-MIN method yields identical estimates of AB magnitude (15% in each). Failure of T1 difficulty to modulate AB magnitude has been reported in several other studies. When the magnitude of the AB in Chun and Potter’s (1995, Experiment 4) study is estimated using the slope of the functions (MAX-MIN), there is no evidence that the more difficult T1 produced the larger AB. Contradicting the above-mentioned outcomes, a number of studies have concluded that T1 difficulty does modulate the magnitude of the AB. The validity of those conclusions is questionable, as detailed below.

Exp 5B

Interim summary and conclusion

Findings

Concluding comments