Abstract
BackgroundWhen a second target (T2) is presented in close succession of a first target (T1) within a stream of non-targets, people often fail to detect T2–a deficit known as the attentional blink (AB). Two types of theories can be distinguished that have tried to account for this phenomenon. Whereas attentional-control theories suggest that protection of consolidation processes induces the AB, limited-resource theories claim that the AB is caused by a lack of resources. According to the latter type of theories, increasing difficulty of one or both targets should increase the magnitude of the AB. Similarly, attentional-control theories predict that a difficult T1 increases the AB due to prolonged processing. However, the prediction for T2 is not as straightforward. Prolonged processing of T2 could cause conflicts and increase the AB. However, if consolidation of T2 is postponed without loss of identity, the AB might be attenuated.Methodology/Principal FindingsParticipants performed an AB task that consisted of a stream of distractor non-words and two target words. Difficulty of T1 and T2 was manipulated by varying word-frequency. Overall performance for high-frequency words was better than for low-frequency words. When T1 was highly frequent, the AB was reduced. The opposite effect was found for T2. When T2 was highly frequent, performance during the AB period was relatively worse than for a low-frequency T2. A threaded-cognition model of the AB was presented that simulated the observed pattern of behavior by taking changes in the time-course of retrieval and consolidation processes into account. Our results were replicated in a subsequent ERP study.Conclusions/SignificanceThe finding that a difficult low-frequency T2 reduces the magnitude of the AB is at odds with limited-resource accounts of the AB. However, it was successfully accounted for by the threaded-cognition model, thus providing an explanation in terms of attentional control.
Highlights
It is well known that the human mind is limited in the conscious processing of relevant stimuli when presented in close temporal proximity in a sequential stream of irrelevant stimuli
Most people show a reduced ability to successfully report a second target (T2) when presented within 200–500 ms of a first (T1), a phenomenon known as the attentional blink (AB) [1,2]
None of the factors (i.e., T2 word frequency and lag) significantly predicted T1 accuracy. These results are in accordance with the findings of Experiment 1 presented above
Summary
It is well known that the human mind is limited in the conscious processing of relevant stimuli (e.g., letters) when presented in close temporal proximity in a sequential stream of irrelevant stimuli (e.g., digits). Most people show a reduced ability to successfully report a second target (T2) when presented within 200–500 ms of a first (T1), a phenomenon known as the attentional blink (AB) [1,2]. Because there are not enough resources available for the processing of T2, an AB occurs In these theories, a capacity-limitation of the attentional system underlies the phenomenon of the attentional blink. Whereas attentional-control theories suggest that protection of consolidation processes induces the AB, limited-resource theories claim that the AB is caused by a lack of resources. According to the latter type of theories, increasing difficulty of one or both targets should increase the magnitude of the AB. If consolidation of T2 is postponed without loss of identity, the AB might be attenuated
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.