This article applies to:
Experiment Author: Adapted from STEP and used with permission of Brian MacWhinney
Two regions on the screen that do not touch are cued, and participants are supposed to determine which target appears in them. Distractors are flashed between them, in an effort to confuse the participants.
This experiment displays two letters on opposite sides of the computer screen and participants must determine if the letters do or do not match. There is a fixation point followed by the stimuli. There are distractors present but the target letters will appear in boxes that are always located in the same area of the screen. The letters are determined using an InLine script object and randomized sampling from the List Objects, Onset and NoOnset. Both lists contain 60 samples which are set to cycle three times each for 360 total trials. Users must respond to stimuli using a capital "L" or "D".
Device display properties in E-Studio should be set to 640x480 pixels. Caps lock should be active to make responding easier for participants.
Kramer, A.F., & Hahn, S. (1995). Splitting the beam: Distribution of attention over noncontiguous regions.
In an effort to examine the flexibility with which attention can be allocated in visual space, we investigated whether subjects could selectively attend to multiple noncontiguous locations in the visual field. We examined this issue by pre-queueing two separate areas of the visual field and requiring subjects to decide whether the letters that appeared in these locations matched or mismatched while distractors that primed either the match or mismatch response were presented between the cued locations. If the distractors had no effect on performance, it would provide evidence that subjects can divide attention over noncontiguous areas of space. Subjects were able to ignore the distractors when the targets and distractors were presented as non-onset stimuli (i.e., when pre-masks were changed into the targets and distractors). In contrast, when the targets and distractors were presented as sudden-onset stimuli, subjects were unable to ignore the distractors. These results begin to define the conditions under which attention can be flexibly deployed to multiple noncontiguous locations in the visual field.
Works Cited by the Experiment
Baylis, G., & Driver, J. (1993). Visual attention and objects: evidence for hierarchical coding of location. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 451-470.
Broadbent, D.E. (1982). Task combination and selective intake of information. Acta Psychologica, 50, 253-290.
Castiello, U., & Umilta, C. (1992). Splitting focal attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 837-848.
Czerwinski, M., Lightfoot, N., & Shiffrin, R.M. (1992). Automatization and training in visual search. American Journal of Psychology, 105, 271-315.
Duncan, J. (1984). Selective attention and the organization of visual information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 501-517.
Eriksen, C.W., & St. James, J.D. (1986). Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model. Perception & Psychophysics, 40, 225-240.
Eriksen, C.W., & Yeh, Y.Y. (1985). Allocation of attention in the visual field. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 583-597.
Heinze, H., Luck, S.J., Muente, T.F., Goes, A., Mangun, G.R., & Hillyard, S.A. (1994). Attention to adjacent and separate positions in space: An electro-physiological analysis. Perception & Psychophysics, 56, 42-52.
Jonides, J. (1983). Further toward a model of the mind's eye movement. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 21, 247-250.
Kahneman, D., Treisman, A, & Gibbs, B. (1992). The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 175-219.
Koshino, H., Warner, C., & Juola, J. (1992). Relative effectiveness of central, peripheral, and abrupt-onset cues in visual attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45, 609-631.
Kramer, A.F., & Jacobson, A. (1991). Perceptual organization and focused attention: The role of objects and proximity in visual processing. Perception & Psychophysics, 50, 267-284.
Krose, B., & Julesz, B. (1989). The control and speed of shifts in attention. Vision Research, 29, 1607-1619.
LaBerge, D., & Brown, V. (1989). Theory of attentional operation in shape identification. Psychological Review, 96, 101-124.
Madden, D. (1992). Selective attention and visual search: Revision of an allocation model and application to age differences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 821-836.
Muller, H., & Rabbitt, P. (1989). Reflexive and voluntary orienting of attention: Time course of activation and resistance to disruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 315-330.
Pan, K., & Eriksen, C. (1993). Attentional distribution in the visual field during same-different judgments as assessed by response competition. Perception & Psychophysics, 53, 134-144.
Posner, M.I., Snyder, C.R.R., & Davidson, B.J. (1980). Attention and the detection of signals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 160-174.
Shaw, M., & Shaw, P. (1977). Optimal allocation of cognitive resources to spatial location. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 201-211.
Sperling, G. (1984). A unified theory of attention and signal detection. In R. Parasuraman & D. Davies (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp.103-182). New York: Academic Press.
Theeuwes, J. (1991). Exogenous and endogenous control of attention: The effects of visual onsets and offsets. Perception & Psychophysics, 49, 83-90.
Theeuwes, J. (1992). Perceptual selectivity for color and form. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 599-606.
Yantis, S. (1993). Stimulus-driven attentional capture. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2, 156-161.
Yantis, S., & Jonides, J. (1990). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: voluntary versus automatic allocation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 121-134.
Please sign in to leave a comment.