Week 5: Attention 1 & 2 Flashcards

1
Q

Definition of Attention:

1. Sustained Attention (Alertness)

A

Related to psychological arousal (continuum from drowsy, inattentive to alert, attentive)

Problem of vigilance: performance declines over a long watch (radar operators, quality control inspectors)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Definition of Attention:

2. Selective Attention

A

Limited in the number of stimuli we can process

Attend to one stimulus at the expense of others

People as limited capacity systems: don’t treat all stimuli equally

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

“The Cocktail Party Problem”
Cherry (1953)

How do we follow a conversation in a crowded environment?

A
  1. Can “pick out” one conversation from background
  2. “Picking out:” processes take sound energy at ear, translate to understanding
  3. Translation is selective (stimuli not all treated equally)

To study this process: Dichotic Listening and Shadowing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Dichotic Listening and Shadowing task:

details and results

A

2 channel: sensory pathway acting as a source of information

Attended vs unattended:
Shadow Message 1, then ask about contents of Message 2

Results
Unattended Channel:
 No memory for unattended message
 Switch from English to German: not noticed
 Switch from male to female: noticed
 Reversed speech: “something queer”
 Switch from voice to 400 cps pure tone: noticed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Dichotic Listening and Shadowing task:
Cherry 1953:
Conclusions

A

 Only superficial (physical) features perceived
 (things distinguishing voice, non-voice, or male, female)
 Semantic content not analysed (language, meaning)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Pre-attentive processes vs. focal attention

Neisser, 1967

A

 Sensory (physical) features processed pre-attentively

 Meaning requires focal attention

Plausible: aware of unattended stimuli only superficially

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Cherry’s version of

How Do We Select the Attended Message

A

Binaural presentation (Cherry): both ears receive both messages, same voice, differ only in content

Very difficult!

Source localisation in space important cue (phase differences in arrival times at ear)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Criticism of Cherry (3)

A

looked at what is remembered but we want what is perceived.

Confounds: perception and memory

Might be perceived then forgotten?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Filter Theory (Broadbent, 1958)

Attention acts as a filter to select stimuli for further processing
S10

A

Due to this limited capacity, a selective filter is needed for information processing.

All stimuli are processed initially for basic physical properties.

based on physical properties, the selective filter allows for certain stimuli to pass through the filter for further processing, while unattended stimuli will be filtered out and lost

splitting of incoming stimuli to attended or unattended channels

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q
Filter Theory (Broadbent, 1958)
Procedure and Process
A

Meaning extracted in limited capacity channel

Filter precedes channel, protects it from overload

All stimuli stored briefly in short term store (STS)

Raw acoustic trace, decays quickly if not selected

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Evidence for Filter Theory
Split-Span Experiment:
Details and Results

A

Interaction of short term store and filter

Dichotic digit stream:
 Temporal order: 3-4 correct  Ear-by-ear recall: 6 correct

Prefer stating one side before the other

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Evidence for Filter Theory
Split-Span Experiment:
Theoretical stuff

A

Ear-by-ear recall needs 1 filter switch
5 switches needed to follow temporal order
Thus EBE > Temporal correctness

Switches take time, Short term store trace decays

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

The Failure of Filter Theory:
“Dear Aunt Jane” experiment
(Gray & Wedderburn, 1960)

A

Split-span experiment with meaningful material

Preferred recall follows semantic context, not presentation ear

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

The Failure of Filter Theory:

Moray (1959)

A

Person’s own name often detected on unattended channel

Selection based on meaning not consistent with idea that meaning only extracted on the attended channel

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

The Early vs. Late Selection Debate
Early: Treisman 1961
Late (Deutsch^2, 1963; Norman 1968)
Disagreement about location and properties of filter

A
Early: Treisman 1961
1) Sensory Analysis
2) Filter
3) Semantic Analysis (LTM)
=> Report
Late: (Deutsch^2, 1963; Norman 1968)
1) Sensory Analysis
2) Semantic Analysis (LTM)
3) Filter
=> Report
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Attenuation Model (Treisman, 1961)

A

attended and unattended both pass through the filter.

unattended partly blocked (attenuates)

Filter biased by context, message salience

Highly salient stimuli (name), semantically related material (Dear Aunt Jane) gets through filter, shifts attention

17
Q

Evidence for Early Selection

Treisman & Geffen (1967)

A

Shadow and ignore channel:
tap sound
% correct detections higher on shadowed channel, but not zero on unattended channel

Consistent with filter that attenuates stimuli instead of blocking them

18
Q

Criticism of Early Selection

A

Complexity of filter: Needs to respond to semantic context, distinguish related from unrelated stimuli – simpler alternative?

19
Q

Late Selection

A

Bottom-up and top-down selection mechanisms

Bottom-up, stimulus driven and top-down, selection by “pertinence” (relevance to task)

Need both kinds of activation to get through filter, otherwise decays

20
Q

Early Selection VS Late Selection

agreements and differences

A

ES and LS theories agree recognition needs (a) encoding, (b) access to LTM

LS theory: All stimuli access LTM, not sufficient for awareness
ES theory: LTM activation = conscious awareness
LS theory: need to pass filter for awareness

21
Q

Evidence for Late Selection

McKay (1973)

A

Semantic processing on unattended channel

Recognition biased by previous shadowing task

Shadow:
“They threw stones towards the bank” (ambiguous)
Ignore:
“ ... ... ... ... ... river” or “ ... ... ... ... ... money”
Recognition:
“They threw stones towards ...”
(1) “...the side of the river”
(2) “... the savings and loan”
22
Q

Evidence for Late Selection

Von Wright, Anderson & Stenman (1975)

A

Classical condition GSR to target words (word+shock)

In shadowing task:
in ignore channel activate have word

Semantic activation in the absence of attention (word result to GSR)

Generalised to other words in category