An attentional blink in the absence of spatial attention: a cost of awareness?

Ophir, Eyal Alef; Sherman, Eyal; Lamy, Dominique

doi:10.1007/s00426-018-1100-x

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That is, poorer T2 performance indicates that T2 was presented in the blink period induced by T1. This impairment in T2 processing is generally assumed to be a consequence of attentional selection of T1 (but see Ophir et al, 2020).…”

Section: Paradigmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Terms of debate: Consensus definitions to guide the scientific discourse on visual distraction

Liesefeld¹,

Lamy²,

Gaspelin³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hypothesis-driven research rests on clearly articulated scientific theories. The building blocks for communicating these theories are scientific terms. Obviously, communication – and thus, scientific progress – is hampered if the meaning of these terms varies idiosyncratically across (sub)fields and even across individual researchers within the same subfield. We have formed an international group of experts representing various theoretical stances with the goal to homogenize the use of the terms that are most relevant to the field of visual distraction in visual search. Our discussions revealed striking heterogeneity and we had to invest much time and effort to increase our mutual understanding of each other’s use of central terms, which turned out to be strongly related to our respective theoretical positions. We present the outcomes of these discussions in a glossary and provide some context in several essays. Specifically, we explicate how central terms are used in the distraction literature and consensually sharpen their definitions in order to enable communication across theoretical standpoints. Where applicable, we also explain how the respective constructs can be measured. We believe that this novel type of adversarial collaboration can serve as a model for other fields of psychological research that strive to build a solid groundwork for theorizing and communicating by establishing a common language. For the field of visual distraction, the present paper should facilitate communication across theoretical standpoints and may serve as an introduction and reference text for newcomers.

show abstract

Section: Paradigmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Terms of debate: Consensus definitions to guide the scientific discourse on visual distraction

Liesefeld¹,

Lamy²,

Gaspelin³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A secondary hypothesis was the replication of nonassociative priming effects obtained in previous studies (Fisk & Haase, 2020a; Haase & Fisk, 2020), but with more stringent masking parameters (forward and backward masking, sometimes called sandwich masking). Another secondary hypothesis is that response times might vary depending upon the visibility of the prime stimulus: a cost of awareness effect (Alef Ophir et al, 2020).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The necessity of equivalent comparisons for interpreting masked priming effects: Implications for studies of unconscious perceptual processing.

Fisk¹,

Haase²

2023

Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many masked priming studies compare measurements from two conditions: Direct reports of judging heavily masked, briefly presented prime stimuli versus indirect priming effects collected from judgments of easily visible targets. However, comparisons between unequal conditions may introduce a significant interpretational weakness for inferring unconscious processing. Examples of unequal conditions may include differences in tasks, stimulus visibility, difficulty (hard vs. easy), and statistical properties (unequal metrics). We addressed these problems by aiming for methodologically equivalent direct and indirect task conditions. Lexical decisions (words vs. nonwords) of prime and target stimuli were collected, with masked prime visibility being manipulated (short = 16 ms, medium = 51 ms, and long = 103 ms prime durations). For short duration primes, no statistically significant prime discrimination or priming effects were found, with Bayesian analyses being inconclusive. In contrast, the long duration prime conditions showed significant prime discrimination and a priming effect. A sensitivity analysis showed that direct sensitivity greatly exceeded indirect sensitivity to the prime stimuli in the medium and the long prime duration conditions. The importance of equivalent testing conditions and statistical analysis is discussed.

show abstract