Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byAnnabella Blankenship Modified over 6 years ago
1
Attention, Effort, and Resource Allocation
September 6, 2007
2
What Is Attention? “Every one knows what attention is. It is the taking possession by the mind, in a clear and vivid form of one out of what seem several simultaneously possible objects or trains of thought. Focalization, concentration of consciousness are of its essence. It implies withdrawal from some things in order to deal with others…” (James, 1890, p. 403)
3
Attention is... An attitude of mind
Relative proportion of activated traces to all memory traces Some form of energy or desire involving will or effort A filter, a skill An allocation of resources A spotlight, a selective attenuator
4
Characteristics General agreement regarding two characteristics outlined by James: Sensory attention driven by environmental events (bottom-up; stimulus-driven; exogenous) Volitional attention to both external and internal stimuli (top-down; goal-driven; endogenous) May be thought of as automatic vs. controlled, respectively.
5
Automatic Vs. Controlled Processing Distinction
Automatic processes no capacity limitation; fast do not require attention, effort difficult to modify once learned Controlled processes limited in capacity; slow require attentional resources, effort can be used flexibly in changing circumstances
6
The brain network involved in the stimulus-driven attentional system, based on findings from various brain-imaging studies in which participants detected low-frequency target stimuli. The full names of the brain areas are in the text. From Corbetta and Shulman (2002). Copyright © 2002 by Nature Publishing Group.
7
The brain network involved in the goal-directed attentional system, based on findings from various brain-imaging studies in which participants were expecting certain visual stimuli. The full names of the brain areas are in the text. From Corbetta and Shulman (2002). Copyright © 2002 by Nature Publishing Group.
8
Purposes of Attention Cope with inherent capacity limitation of brain
Facilitate stimulus detection Facilitate stimulus perception Facilitate thinking Facilitate memory Recruit relevant processors Prepare for action James
9
Varieties of Attention
Focused attention (processing only one input) Orienting to sensory events Detecting signals for focal (conscious) processing Divided attention (processing multiple inputs according to nature of inputs and goals) Maintaining a vigilant state
10
Varieties of Attention
11
Dimensions of Attention
Focality (detection vs. selective attention) Duration (brief vs. sustained attention) Input channel Visual attention Spatial Object-based Auditory attention What, where Cognitive effect (facilitation vs. inhibition)
12
Why have an attentional system?
-brain as a limited-capacity processor; that which is selected should be consistent with goals and expectations
13
Early Visual Attention
Interface between Attention and STM: Attentional blink
14
Early Visual Attention (Cont’d)
Interface between Attention and STM: Repetition blindness
15
Early Visual Attention
AB and RB can be doubly dissociated (Chun) Making targets different from distractors alleviates AB but not RB Enhancing episodic distinctiveness of the two targets eliminates RB but not AB May represent different things AB represents bottleneck in attentional processing, RB reflects failure of token individuation
16
Selective Attention Selective processing of some information but not others Filter vs. capacity models Important research paradigms Dichotic listening Shadowing
17
Dear Linguist: I am hoping you might be able to provide some information for me regarding dichotic listening. I work in a call center in Vancouver, Canada. The position I work in requires that we monitor 2 separate phone lines at the same time with 2 headsets (one on each ear) for 8 hour shifts. We monitor the content of messages being left by callers, and subsequently accept or refuse their recorded greeting/message. There is a fairly large staff (approx. 60 employees) here that monitors the phone lines 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The content of the messages is often rude and unsavory - we monitor a singles meeting place chat connector and callers can get fairly explicit - but this is not the issue that concerns me. The position did involve listening to single lines before a company expansion over a year ago when it changed to double-line monitoring. It seems that this double listening is affecting people negatively. Having done this for 8 months now, I know that I have been experiencing psychological trauma (depression, confusion, irritability, chronic headaches etc.), as have a number of my co-workers. My question is this: Is this type of dual listening harmful in any way,or furthermore, have any studies been done in regards to the effects this type of extended exposure to dual listening may have on the human brain or psyche? I have just started looking into this - your name came up in a web search for dichotic listening - and I would greatly appreciate any information or reference that you could pass on. Thanks. -Name, Occupation
19
Cherry (1953) Interested in attentional “popout” of relevant information (“cocktail party effect”) Two messages, same voice, both ears: subjects could invariably separate messages, but with difficulty; uses physical/source characteristics Dichotic listening with shadowing Recalls little if any content from other ear Often doesn’t recall language Can recognize it as speech/nonspeech, and can recognize male-female
20
Broadbent (1958) Influential paper on focused (selective) attention; felt by many to be a critical ‘cornerstone’ paper in cognitive psychology Influenced by Cherry’s shadowing results Used dichotic listening, and found a strong tendency to report digits ‘by ear’, thus reflecting a tendency to select based on perceptual/physical characteristics of the input
21
Broadbent’s Filter Theory
Stimulus #1 Stimulus #2 Limited capacity STM Selection Filter Sensory register/buffer
22
Problems with Broadbent’s Theory: Recall across ears can be organized (automatically?)
23
Problems With Broadbent’s Filter Model
Sometimes attention doesn’t follow input source: Gray & Wedderburn (1960) fan out rage tas tic ous Can demonstrate that “unattended” information is processed phonologically or semantically: Corteen & Wood (1972) EDR’s to shock-associated words in an unattended channel – city name study
24
Early Vs. Late Selection
“Early” theories (Broadbent, Treisman) selection takes place well before extensive (e.g., semantic) analysis takes place contradicted by studies showing semantic effects in unattended ear “Late” theories (Deutsch & Deutsch) extensive analysis of stimuli takes place before selection raises issue of benefits of selective attention shadowing delayed by presentation of a synonym in the other ear; recall biased by semantic interpretation (e.g., bank-river, vs. bank-money)
25
Broadbent Treisman Deutsch & Deutsch STM Sensory register
Selection Filter Stim#1 Stim#2 Treisman Sensory register Attenuator STM Stim#1 Stim#2 Deutsch & Deutsch STM Sensory register Stim#1 Stim#2
26
Perceptual Load Theory
Everyone has limited attentional capacity The amount of attentional capacity allocated to the main task depends on its perceptual load, which is determined by “the number of units in the display and the nature of processing required for each unit” (Lavie & Tsal, 1994, p. 185) “Any spare capacity beyond that taken by the high-priority relevant stimuli is automatically allocated to the irrelevant stimuli” (Lavie, 1995, p. 452). Thus, the total available attentional capacity is always allocated to processing
27
Evidence r t x p q k _ _ x _ _ _
Mean target identification time as a function of distractor type (neutral [N] vs. incompatible [Z]) and perceptual load (low vs. high). Based on data in Lavie (1995).
28
A Capacity Model Kahneman (1973)
Supplements previous bottom-up analysis with a consideration of top-down influences Emphasizes concept of processing resources Attention and mental effort are strongly correlated Arousal can work to increase processing resources
29
Kahneman’s Model
30
Understanding the Effects of Attention is Important When there are Limitations on Processing
Resource-limited processes Processes dependent on the availability of resources that can be devoted to task solution Applying more effort or processing resources increases task performance If output not available until task is finished, then devoting more resources decreases RT If output continuously available, then performance level increases Data-limited processes Processes dependent upon the quality of data input, rather than upon resource allocation Applying more resources may have little effect on performance Most processes have both resource- and data-limited components
32
Basic Signal Detection Framework
Present Absent “Yes” True Positive False Positive True Negative False Negative “No” Basic Signal Detection Framework
33
Focused Visual Attention
The Attentional “Spotlight” model items within a small portion of the field can be seen clearly Posner’s ‘covert’ shifting of the spotlight Problem: proximity not always facilitative –e.g. Driver & Baylis, 1989 – common movement Zoom-lens model (Eriksen & Yeh, 1985) Magnification inversely proportional to FOV ‘magnification’ can be increased or decreased Grouping processes affect spatial extent of attention Problem: attention can be object-based; objects outside the zoom can be processed or even inhibited
35
Evidence for Spotlight
Location-specific facilitation of attention RT’s faster when object appears in cued location search for target letter and report orientation of “U”; done better when two letters are close together T vs. T
36
Focused Visual Attention
The Attentional “Spotlight” model items within a small portion of the field can be seen clearly Posner’s ‘covert’ shifting of the spotlight Problem: proximity not always facilitative –e.g. Driver & Baylis, 1989 – common movement overrides proximity Zoom-lens model (Eriksen & Yeh, 1985) Magnification inversely proportional to FOV ‘magnification’ can be increased or decreased Grouping processes affect spatial extent of attention Split attention (Awh & Pashler) Problem: attention can be object-based
37
Experiments Demonstrating Split Attention (a problem for the zoom-lens model)
Awh and Pashler (2000). (a) Shaded areas indicate the cued locations and the near and far locations are not cued; (b) probability of target detection at valid (left or right) and invalid (near or far) locations. Based on information in Awh and Pashler (2000). Array consists of 23 letters and 2 numbers. Before each trial, subject receives two cues (shaded) indicating the likely (80%) location of the digit targets, which they were asked to report. If the zoom lens model is correct, a digit appearing between the two cued locations should be reported accurately, but if split attention is possible, accuracy should be low. The graph shows a 60% reduction in accuracy of target detection in the near condition, indicating that split attention is possible. Still, there is a small effect of “zoom-lens” since the accuracy of “far” detections is 20% worse still.
38
Object-Based Attention
Subjects were asked to determine whether the two irregular ends in the display contained the same or different number of “bumps”. The ability to do that across a single, unoccluded object, should be fastest, and the authors were interested to know whether the data favored an object vs. a spatial framework. If object-based attention existed, the RT to perform the same-different judgment should be no different for the occluded than the unoccluded objects. What they found was that RT for occluded and unoccluded objects were not different, but both were slower than the RT to do the same-different judgment across two objects. Behrmann, et al (1998) JEP: HPP, 24,
39
Inhibition in Attention
40
Inhibition in Attention (Cont’d) Negative Priming Paradigm
Attended repeat Task = name red drawing Unrelated Unattended repeat Prime Probe
41
A B Attention as Facilitation Attention as Inhibition Stimulus 1
Preattentive Processing Further Cognitive Processing ATTENTION A Attention as Inhibition Stimulus 1 Stimulus 2 Preattentive Processing Further Cognitive Processing ATTENTION B
42
Inhibition of Return (IOR)
“A reduced perceptual priority for information in a region that recently enjoyed a higher priority” (Samuel & Kat, 2003, p. 897) A bias favouring novel locations and objects Posner and Cohen (1984) IOR due to inhibition of perceptual and/or attentional processes Taylor and Klein (1998) IOR due to inhibition of motor processes Prime and Ward (2004) ERP study IOR is a perceptual phenomenon not in motor response
43
Models of Visual Search
Feature integration model rapid initial parallel process not dependent on attention subsequent attention-dependent serial processes in which features are combined to form objects attention provides “glue” binding features together into an object; can only do this one object at a time feature combination affected by stored knowledge without focused attention, features combined randomly, producing ‘illusory conjunctions’
44
Display Size Effect Find the “T” L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L T L L
45
Feature Search & Feature Singletons
L L L L L L L L L L L L O L L L L L O O O O O O O O O O O O O T O O Find the “T” Find the “O”
46
Treisman & Gelade (1980) Find the “Green T” Find the “B lue Letter”
L L L T L L T L L L T L L T L L T L L L L L T L L L T L L T L T L T L L L T L L L T L L L L L L L T L L T L L T T L L L L L L L L L T L L L L T T T L T T L L L L L L T L L L T L L L T L T L T L T L L T L T L L L T T L L L T L T T L L S L R M T N X A Y W S B X N I F M I Q W A S Z X L K P M B E W E R U I N U O W L X P D G H Find the “Green T” Find the “B lue Letter”
48
S S S S S S S Feature Conjunctions & Illusory Conjunctions
Find the triangle Find the “$”
49
S S S S S S S Similarity vs. Feature Conjunctions Find the “R”
Q W E + T Y [ # S @ ! & F ) W B X K A M J + H F I O U ? * P Q A G D B > / ( S T U K = * Q A Z O Y K C V % K C X S T P U * E & # N B Z % \ ) P O ! * K J D A B ^ S W Q I C K M N $ G + ( Y Z R L S * B N T & Q C D > @ W % K S { H X } r s t + t y [ # s @ y n k ) w l s i a b r + l f R g u ? ! < q ( p e c # ] “ t u v l + * p b a p z l d w x l d % t ^ q v + f ! # m c a = } * q s “ * l k e b c ^ t x s j % l n = @ h ? ) z a s m \ # c o u / b d e < @ p * j w + o t } S S S S S S S It’s not just feature conjunctions, it’s item similarity that drives performance on visual search tasks. Find the “R”
50
Key Takeaway Points Generally agreed that two processes are involved in visual search (parallel & serial), though recent neuroimaging data suggests otherwise – substantial overlap in brain areas involved Different visual features are processed independently Speed of visual search depends on set size and similarity of targets to distractors Perceptually grouped objects will be selected or rejected together; grouping probably takes place prior to attentional ‘enhancement’
51
Posner’s paradigm
52
Posner’s paradigm
53
Posner’s paradigm
54
Posner’s paradigm •
55
Posner’s paradigm
56
Posner’s paradigm
57
Posner’s paradigm
58
Posner’s paradigm •
59
Posner’s components of attention
Three components involved in visual attention: Disengage attention from a given stimulus Shift attention from one stimulus to another Engage attention on a new stimulus
63
Dual Task Performance Relevant to processing capacity
Interference methodology a useful tool to determine whether two tasks share resources What determines degree of interference? Task similarity Task difficulty Practice/expertise
64
Sensitivity (d') to auditory and visual signals as a function of concurrent imagery modality (auditory vs. visual). Adapted from Segal and Fusella (1970).
65
Multiple-resource Theories
Wickens (1984). A proposed dimensional structure of human processing resources. From “Processing resources in attention” by Wickens, C.D. in Varieties of Attention edited by R. Parasuraman and D.R. Davies © 1984 by Academic Press. Reproduced by permission of Elsevier.
66
Automatic Vs. Controlled Processing Distinction
Automatic processes no capacity limitation; fast do not require attention difficult to modify once learned Controlled processes limited in capacity; slow require attentional resources can be used flexibly in changing circumstances
68
Norman & Shallice Three levels of functioning:
Fully automatic processes, controlled by well-learned schemas Partially automatic processing, controlled by contention scheduling Deliberate control by a conscious, supervisory attentional system
69
Summary: Important Concepts
Limited-capacity for information-processing (information bottleneck) leads to selective attention Attentional acts take time and effort Attentional control re: goals and plans Automatic vs. Controlled processing Attention and consciousness
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.