attention - what happens to the info we ignore

Question 1

to what extent do we process the stimuli we ignore?

Answer 1

• Selective attention allows us to focus on some stimuli and ignore others.
  
  • But to what extent to we process the stimuli we ignore?
  • E.g., other people’s conversations
  • Where does the bottleneck reside and where does selection take place

Question 2

early selection

Answer 2

• Stuff gets filtered out early
  
  • Don’t process the meaning of it

Question 3

late selection

Answer 3

• Process the meaning of it
  
  • Gets filtered out later

Question 4

the ‘cocktail party effect’

Answer 4

• Colin Cherry (1953)

Question 5

dichotic listening task

Answer 5

• Introduced by Cherry (1953)
  
  • Present different messages to each ear
  • Subjects attended one ear and ignored the other
  • Repeat attended message out loud - shadowing

Question 6

dichotic listening results

Answer 6

• Participants shadowed the attended message easily
  
  • When asked about the unattended message:
  • Physical characteristics (e.g., sex of voice, large changes in pitch) usually reported.
  • But not much else
    · Rarely noticed when unattended message was in foreign language or reversed speech
    · No content remembered
• Even when the same word was presented 35 time

Question 7

broadbent’s filter theory (1958)

Answer 7

· An early-selection model - filtering occurs before incoming stimuli are analysed to the semantic level (e.g., surface features but not meaning analysed)

Question 8

parts of the filter model

Answer 8

· Sensory store - holds incoming information for a short period of time
· Filter - analyses messages based on physical characteristics like tone of voice, pitch, location of stimulus (which ear).
· Detector - information is processed to determine meaning.
· Short-term memory - holds information for general processing.

Question 9

problems with early selection

Answer 9

· Moray (1959) - subjects heard their name in the unattended stream
· Triesman (1960) - bilinguals influenced by unattended stream if it is in second language
· Gray and Weddeburn (1960):
- Response should have been “Dear Jane”
- But subjects said “Dear Aunt Jane”

Question 10

Triesman’s attenuation model

Answer 10

· Still an early-selection theory
· Key modification to filter theory - unattended messages attenuated rather than lost completely

Question 11

so how does this explain “breakthrough”?

Answer 11

· Words need to meet a certain threshold of signal strength to be detected
· Thresholds for certain words lowered so more easily detected
· E.g., own name, or words primed by context

Question 12

late selection models

Answer 12

· E.g., Deutsch and Deutsch (1963), Kahneman (1973), Duncan (1980)
· Both attended and ignored inputs processed to stage of semantic (meaning) analysis
· Selection:
- Takes place at higher stage of processing
- Based on analysis of which input is more important/demands a response

Question 13

late selection models can explain

Answer 13

MacKay (1973) - dichotic listening:
- attended stream - ambiguous sentence
- unattended stream - biasing word
- if “money”, “bank” was more likely interpreted as financial institution
response competition interference e.g., Eriksen and Eriksen (1974):
- incongruent distractor in irrelevant location slows RTs
- distractor identity processed

Question 14

late selection models can explain 2

Answer 14

• negative priming - responses to previously ignored stimuli are slowed.
• e.g., Tipper and Driver (1988):
• task - categorise red stimuli, ignore green
• result - responses to word slowed when preceded by semantically related ignored picture
• suggests ignored stimuli is semantically categorised and inhibited

Question 15

Lavie’s load theory

Answer 15

· Both early and late selection are possible
· The stage of selection depends on availability of perceptual capacity which in turn depends on the perceptual demands (or “load”) of the task stimuli

Question 16

load theory

Answer 16

· Perceptual capacity is limited
· Tasks with high perceptual load exhaust capacity
- Irrelevant distractors are filtered or attenuated at early, perceptual stage i.e., early selection
· Tasks with low perceptual load leave spare capacity
- Irrelevant distractors are processed
- Late selection

Question 17

evidence supporting load theory - behavioural measures of distraction

Answer 17

· Response competition effects found under low load
· Reduce or eliminated under high load
· Similar effects found with other measures
· E.g., irrelevant distractor measure

Question 18

evidence supporting load theory - inattentional blindness

Answer 18

· Cartwright Finch and Lavie (2006) - 6 trials - unexpected stimulus on final trial

Question 19

evidence supporting load theory - neuroimaging evidence

Answer 19

· Schwarts et al, (2005):
- Low load - detect red cross
- High load - detect conjunction (e.g., yellow upright)
- Ignore background
· High perceptual load reduces visual cortex response to background
· High perceptual load reduces amygdala response to fearful faces (Bishop et al, 2007)

Question 20

implications for individual differences

Answer 20

· Efficiency of selective attention depends on availability of perceptual capacity
- Individual with high perceptual capacity need high load to avoid distraction
· Capacity differences associated with:
- Autism
- Age (children and older adults have reduced capacity)
- Video game experience
· Green and Bavelier (2003) - video game players remained distracted under high load
· Similar effects found in relation to:
- Autism
- Age
- Congenital deafness