Ch 4 Flashcards
Attention
Ability to focus on specific objects, locations, or tasks
Selective Attention: Filter Metaphor (not literally a filter)
- Too Much information and cannot pay attention to it all
- Focusing one thing and ignoring the rest. Processing some information at the cost of other information
- Filter out information we don’t want to pay attention to
Divided Attention
When we try to simultaneously attend to multiple things
Data
Measure patterns of human performance (DVs, such as: accuracy, errors, speed) as we manipulate variables (IVs)
Selective Attention Therories
Filtering occurs in the steam of info processing when
Selective attention filtering happens….
- Early: Before information is processed for meaning (Broadbent’s bottleneck theory)
- Intermediate: Both early and later (Treisman’s attenuation theory)
- Late- After info processed for meaning (Mackay’s late selection theory)
Data
Test further prediction made by theories
Theory
Devise theories to explain the patterns of data
Theory
Refine/and/or replace theories based on tests
Dichotic Listening Task (1950)
Attended Side: Paying attention to
Unattended Side: Not paying attention to
Shadowing
Participants saying out loud what they are hearing
Results of the Unattended Side
Participants couldn’t recall what the content was
Sensory
Participants did notice:
- voice vs. noise
- male vs. female voice (low vs. high)
Semantic
Participants did not notice:
- English vs. foreign language
- Played backwards
Basic sensory physical characteristics are processed from both sides, but meaning is only processed from the side attended to
Broadbent’s Theory of Early Selection
Input -> Attended ear, Unattended ear, -> Sensory Processing/Memory -> Selective Filter (based on physical properties -> processing for meaning -> STM/WM ->LTM or -> Response
Dear Aunt Jane Study (1960)
Attended Side
Unattended Side
Dear Aunt Jane Study (1960)
Attended Side: This side of the ear you hear a word number word number
Unattended Side: This side you hear a number word number word
Dear Aunt Jane Results
Participants’ attention jumped back and forth between the two ears without them realizing it. This means there was some processing of the meaning on the supposedly unattended side, in contrast to the early selection model
Cocktail Party Effect (Moray 1959)
Some salient stimuli from outside our focus can still grab our attention. That means even unattended info must have been processed for meaning in contrast to the early selection model
Treisman’s Attenuation Model
Input -> Attended ear, Unattended ear, -> Sensory Processing/Memory -> Attenuator (a leaky filter) -> “Dictionary Unit” processes for meaning -> STM/WM -> LTM or -> Response
Dictionary Unit- words have different thresholds (minimum strength needed to pass on to next stage)
- common words
- important words (your name)
Attenuation Theory (Treisman)
Why can we recognize our name in unattended messages?
- Information from attended message is passed on at full strength
- Information from other conversations is attenuated but not eliminated
- Name (and gender) can still be detected because of low threshold for that information
- “Dear Aunt Jane” passes because of low threshold for the word aunt
Low Threshold Word
A word that grabs your attention
They were throwing stones (MacKay 1973)
Attended Side: Ambiguous sentence
Unattended Side: not suppose to be listening
Results of They were throwing stones
The meaning of the unattended side must have been processed.
This suggests that everything gets processed for meaning, and then attention selects what’s used for response
Late Selection Model (MacKay)
Input -> Attended ear, Unattended ear, -> Sensory Processing/Memory -> processes for meaning -> STM/WM -> LTM or -> Response or -> Lost/Forgotten
Selection Attention: resources metaphor
- Beyond filter theories… Capacity/Load theories
- Idea (Lavie)
- Attention is a limited resource
- The amount that information gets processed is based on:
- The resources available (aka capacity) [varies across individuals]
- The load of the task [varies across tasks {and with practice)]
Such theories can work to explain selective attention and divided attention
Processing Capacity
Individual differences across people
Perceptual Load (aka Cognitive Load)
The amount of cognitive load a task takes
Do all tasks use up the same pool of cognitive resources?
1st condition:
Input -> Stimuli that participants are suppose to remember in one ear
2nd condition:
Participants see pictures instead of images
Recognition Memory Test
The more similar two tasks, the greater the cost of divided attention
Bottom line on multi-tasking (divided attention)
Multi-tasking almost always has a cost
Task switching costs-
- It takes longer to do two tasks that you switch back and forth between vs. just doing one util it’s done, then the other
- time to adjust mentally to performing different task
Other costs of Divided Attention: Attention Failures
Sensation without perception
- Inattentional Blindness:
Failure to notice something in clear view
Change Blindness: failure to notice change in something
Change Blindess
Why is detecting the change hard?
Something ( flicker, looking away) disrupts perception, turning this into a memory task
- encode the item, maintain it in memory, compare the memory to the newly perceived item
- Also: our attention is often not already directed at the exact thing that changes
Semantic interference
Cannot ‘filter’ out meaning
Capacity
Filter
Spotlight
Attention:
ADHD
DSM5: People with ADHD show a persistent pattern of inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity that interferees with functioning or development
Inattentive symptos include:
