Attention 2 Flashcards
Describe the difference between early selection and late selection theories
Early selection
-Assume that identification can’t occur without attention
-If stimuli in the irrelevant channel has been identified that it has been attended
Late selection
-Assume that identification can occur without attention
-Meaning is analysed before filtering
-Processing is automatic and not capacity limited
Describe the study by Treisman (1960,1964) linked to channel switching
-Leakage explanation
-Filter is unable to block out info from irrelevant channels, but is able to reduce it
-Info from the irrelevant channel leaks through the filter which can impact attention level
What is slippage?
-It isn’t possible to focus on the relevant channel all of the time as you can’t always aim the attentional resources precisely enough, therefore if the attention isn’t properly focused then it spills into the irrelevant channel
What is spillover?
-If the relevant channel needs less attention than what’s available then the attention spills over to the irrelevant channel
What are 3 studies that are evidence for slippage?
-Lachter et al (2004)
-Conway et al (2001)
-Dawson and Schell (1982)
Describe Lachter et al (2004) study
-Goes against the idea that there can be identification without attention
-Found that there is massive need to reinterpret old experiments and conduct new ones, as there is lack of control for slippage
Describe Conway et al (2001) study
-Own name effect and working memory capacity
-Tested a group with high WMC and one with low WMC
-The high WMC group had 20% hear their own name in the irrelevant channel
-The low WMC group had 65% hear their own name in the irrelevant channel
-Suggest that the low WMC group are more likely to let their attention slip to irrelevant channel, and ones with high WMC can control their attention more
Describe Dawson and Schell (1982) study
-Replication of electric shock conditioning
-They found skin conductance changes, but only in ppts who failed to shadow relevant channel and recalled material from irrelevant channel
-Suggests that there may be spillage that has occurred of attentional resources
What are the two studies that tested whether Broadbent was correct?
-Kouider et al (2014)
-Lachter et al (2004)
Describe Kouider et al (2014) study
-Broadbent was incorrect
-Looked at training with auditory stimuli, left hand response if the word was an animal and right hand response if the word was a man made object
-During sleep, new words were presented, and the ppts prepared a response in their sleep shown through an EEG
-Could suggest that maybe there is identification without attention
Describe Lachter et al (2004) study
-Broadbent was correct
-An irrelevant prime word (lower case) is presented before the target word (upper case)
-Had to press a button if the word in upper case is an actual word or a pseudoword
-Presented in a different location, such as one at the top of the screen and one in the middle
-Had 4 conditions; location as either the same as target or above, and the word identity as same ( cat -> CAT) or different (tip -> CAT)
-Reaction times were faster when the prime and target were the same, and slower when they were different
What are the 2 studies that are evidence for spillover?
-Lavie (1995)
-Lavie and Cox (1997)
Describe Lavie (1995) study
-Combined the assumptions from late and early selection and so is a ‘hybrid theory’
-Looked at the idea that perceptual processing is automatic, but also argued that its capacity is limited
Describe the procedure of Lavie and Cox (1997) study
-Task involved detecting the target letter in the circle (always either X or N), press light for N and press right for X
-The distractor letter presented at the side of the screen is irrelevant and is also either X or N
-Trials were either compatible (target and flanker are same letter) or incompatible (target and flanker are different letters)
-Contained 2 conditions; one with low perceptual load where the target is immediately visible and the high perceptual load where the target is hidden inside other letters
What was the hypothesis of this study?
-Hypothesis - compatibility effect for low perceptual load trials, but not for high perceptual load trials
-Compatibility effect is the difference between reaction times between incompatible trials and compatible trials
