Attention and multidimensional discrimination1

Lindsay, Peter H.; Taylor, M. M.; Forbes, S. M.

doi:10.3758/bf03209520

Cited by 82 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In other words, when two or more dimensions must be judged there is every evidence that they are examined simultaneously, but each one is identified less accurately than if it were the only one being judged. This conclusion is consistent with the 346 results of a recent study that was explicitly concerned with the nature of the processes underlying multidimensional discrimination (Lindsay, Taylor, & Forbes, 1968). Thus, even in situations in which the effects of interdimensional interference, distraction, and response complexity are eliminated, we can expect to observe a trade-off between depth and breadth in information processing.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 80%

Multidimensional stimulus identification

Egeth

Pachella

1969

Perception & Psychophysics

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 80%

Multidimensional stimulus identification

Egeth

Pachella

1969

Perception & Psychophysics

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Other studies have shown that dividing attention between seeing and hearing may lead to decrements in performance (e.g., Arnell & Jolicoeur, 1999;Jolicoeur, 1999;Lindsay, Taylor, & Forbes, 1968;Long, 1975;Massaro & Warner, 1977; also see Pashler, 1998, pp. 157-161).…”

Section: Discussion No Divided-attention Decrementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeing or hearing? Perceptual independence, modality confusions, and crossmodal congruity effects with focused and divided attention

Larsen

McIlhagga

Baert

et al. 2003

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Observers were given brief presentations of pairs of simultaneous stimuli consisting of a visual and a spoken letter. In the visual focused-attention condition, only the visual letter should be reported; in the auditory focused-attention condition, only the spoken letter should be reported; in the divided-attention condition, both letters, as well as their respective modalities, should be reported (forced choice). The proportions of correct reports were nearly the same in the three conditions (no significant dividedattention decrement), and in the divided-attention condition, the probability that the visual letter was correctly reported was independent of whether the auditory letter was correctly reported. However, with a probability much higher than chance, the observers reported hearing the visual stimulus letter or seeing the spoken stimulus letter (modality confusions). The strength of the effect was nearly the same with focused as with divided attention. We also discovered a crossmodal congruity effect: Performance was better when the two letters in a stimulus pair were the same than when they differed in type.

show abstract

“…Similarly, an attentionally demanding vi-sual tracking task can be carried out concurrently with an auditory, but not a visual, word recognition task (Wen, Koch, & Braun, 1995). Although instances of comparable inter-and intramodal interference have been reported as well (Lindsay, Taylor, & Forbes, 1968;Massaro & Warner, 1977), these seem to be more in the nature of exceptions to the rule (Pash1er, 1997, pp. 157ff.…”

Section: Attentional Capacity Is Undifferentiatedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attentional capacity is undifferentiated: Concurrent discrimination of form, color, and motion

Lee

Koch

Braun

1999

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wereport a series of experiments on the concurrent discrimination ofform, color, and motion attributes. All tasks involved joint discrimination of attributes, and positions and were highly demanding of attention. Wequantified interference between concurrent discriminations by establishing the attentionoperating characteristic. Interference was indistinguishable for similar and dissimilar task combinations (form-form, color-color, motion-motion, and color-form, color-motion, motion-color, and motionform, respectively). These results suggest strongly that different visual discriminations draw on the same attentional capacity-in other words, that the capacity of visual attention is undifferentiated.When two visual objects are presented briefly and simultaneously, observers often readily discriminate one object, but find it next to impossible to discriminate both

show abstract

Attention and multidimensional discrimination1

Cited by 82 publications

References 14 publications

Multidimensional stimulus identification

Multidimensional stimulus identification

Seeing or hearing? Perceptual independence, modality confusions, and crossmodal congruity effects with focused and divided attention

Attentional capacity is undifferentiated: Concurrent discrimination of form, color, and motion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About