Awareness and Stimulus-Driven Spatial Attention as Independent Processes

Abstract

To investigate the relation between attention and awareness, we manipulated visibility/awareness and stimulus-driven attention capture among metacontrast-masked visual stimuli. By varying the time interval between target and mask, we manipulated target visibility measured as target discrimination accuracies (ACCs; Experiments 1 and 2) and as subjective awareness ratings (Experiment 3). To modulate stimulus-driven attention capture, we presented the masked target either as a color-singleton (the target stands out by its unique color among homogeneously colored non-singletons), as a non-singleton together with a distractor singleton elsewhere (an irrelevant distractor has a unique color, whereas the target is colored like the other stimuli) or without a singleton (no stimulus stands out; only in Experiment 1). As color singletons capture attention in a stimulus-driven way, we expected target visibility/discrimination performance to be best for target singletons and worst with distractor singletons. In Experiments 1 and 2, we confirmed that the masking interval and the singleton manipulation influenced ACCs in an independent way and that attention capture by the singletons, with facilitated performance in target-singleton compared to distractor-singleton conditions, was found regardless of the interval-induced (in-)visibility of the targets. In Experiment 1, we also confirmed that attention capture was the same among participants with worse and better visibility/discrimination performance. In Experiment 2, we confirmed attention capture by color singletons with better discrimination performance for probes presented at singleton position, compared to other positions. Finally, in Experiment 3, we found that attention capture by target singletons also increased target awareness and that this capture effect on subjective awareness was independent of the effect of the masking interval, too. Together, results provide new evidence that stimulus-driven attention and awareness operate independently from one another and that stimulus-driven attention capture can precede awareness.

Subliminal meaning-contingent attentional orienting: The role of attentional control setting based on displaywide features

“…Different from the neural mechanism of perceptual stimulus processing, unconscious stimulus processing may be through the subcortical pathway. Recently, some researchers have investigated the relationship between consciousness and attention ( Baier et al, 2020 ). For these two independent variables, the visibility or consciousness of stimulus was manipulated by changing the time interval between the stimulus and the mask, and the stimulus-driven attentional capture was manipulated by changing the significance of the stimulus in all objects.…”

Does language rule perception? Testing a radical view of linguistic relativity.

“…We manipulated three within-participant variables: SOA (five steps: 0 ms/85 ms/153 ms/221 ms/289 ms), Singleton Status (target singleton/distractor singleton/no singleton), and Mask Fit (tight fit/loose fit). For the variable SOA, we expected a U-shaped distribution of the accuracy rates depending on the different time intervals between disks and masks (e.g., Agaoglu et al, 2018;Alpern, 1953;Bacon et al, 2013;Baier et al, 2020;Boyer & Ro, 2007;Tata, 2002). To vary the singleton status, one of the four disks in the corners of the inner square shape (either the target or one of the other three stimuli at potential target positions) had a different color than the other 23 disks.…”

“…The sample size was adopted from Baier et al (2020) who used a similar design. To account for the additional independent variable Language (which was not part of the design in Baier et al, 2020), a post hoc power simulation based on the distribution of the data from Experiments 1 and 2 (bootstrapping, 5,000 samples) was calculated. It showed that with a power of 80% and a significance level of .05, differences in accuracy between Korean and German speakers as small as 1.30% (for metacontrast masking) und 1.25% (for object-substitution masking, see Experiment 2) would have been detected.…”

“…In Korea, 24 students (M age = 22.58 years, SD age = 1.93 years) of the Konkuk University (Department of Media and Communication, Seoul) took part. The sample size was adopted from Baier et al (2020) who used a similar design. To account for the additional independent variable Language (which was not part of the design in Baier et al, 2020), a post hoc power simulation based on the distribution of the data from Experiments 1 and 2 (bootstrapping, 5,000 samples) was This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.…”

The Neural Correlates of Access Consciousness and Phenomenal Consciousness Seem to Coincide and Would Correspond to a Memory Center, an Activation Center and Eight Parallel Convergence Centers

“…In the current state of the field, the consensus is increasing in favor of the hypothesis that there is a clear separation between attention and consciousness ( van Boxtel et al, 2010 ; Cohen et al, 2012 ; Koch and Tsuchiya, 2015 ; Baier et al, 2020 ; Davidson et al, 2020 ). In this context, attention is believed to select from among the unconscious perceptual images coming from either the environment or memory, those that are then made conscious by the neural correlates of consciousness (NCC; Mashour et al, 2020 ).…”