2009
DOI: 10.3758/app.71.7.1495
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Temporal tuning and attentional gating: Two distinct attentional mechanisms on the perception of rapid serial visual events

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

2
7
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
2
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In particular, only a few letters were presented when the target appeared immediately after the onset of the sequence, which might have increased the chance level for correct responses, thereby resulting in an apparent improvement in identification performance. This explanation is well consistent with the previous findings that observers tended to randomly report one of the presented letters early in the RSVP sequence, but to more frequently confuse the posttarget distractor and the target later in the sequence (Ariga & Yokosawa, 2005), and that the temporary improved performance for the earliest position was eliminated when several items were presented after the target (Ambinder & Lleras, 2009).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In particular, only a few letters were presented when the target appeared immediately after the onset of the sequence, which might have increased the chance level for correct responses, thereby resulting in an apparent improvement in identification performance. This explanation is well consistent with the previous findings that observers tended to randomly report one of the presented letters early in the RSVP sequence, but to more frequently confuse the posttarget distractor and the target later in the sequence (Ariga & Yokosawa, 2005), and that the temporary improved performance for the earliest position was eliminated when several items were presented after the target (Ambinder & Lleras, 2009).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…On the other hand, attentional awakening is observed with only one target and is thought of as a preparatory (or setup) cost associated with the time required to establish the modulated state of attention needed for processing rapid serial events (Ariga & Yokosawa, 2008). Ambinder and Lleras (2009) used manipulations that selectively modulated the magnitude of either attentional blink or attentional awakening phenomenon but without altering the magnitude of the other phenomenon. Therefore, these two phenomena look superficially similar but rely on different underlying mechanisms: Attentional blink reflects the temporal unavailability of identification or encoding processing for the second target due to the processing of the first target, whereas attentional awakening reflects an unfocused state of attention during the processing of rapidly changing temporal sequences.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, stimuli late in the sequence should receive some degree of facilitation. Ambinder & Lleras (2009) [ 52 ] distinguished the attentional awakening mechanism from attentional blink; the latter refers to difficulty in identifying a second target in a stream if it is presented close in time (around 200 ms) to the first target. It is likely that different attentional mechanisms interacted in the present experimental conditions and we can only say which of them dominated.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A phase interruption would seem to be necessary in order to stop the enhanced processing of the subsequent distracters from drowning out the target information. This preferential phase would then need to be reestablished by another gradual entrainment, explaining the similar time course of the attentional awakening and attentional blink (but see Ambinder and Lleras, 2009). Martin et al (2011) found that the attentional blink was also decreased if jitter was added to the distracters prior to its presentation, indicating that the regular distracter intervals are an important precursor to the blink.…”
Section: Entrainment Of Temporal Attentionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…For instance, when distracters are presented at fixation in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP, most often at 10 Hz; Raymond et al, 1992) task, targets embedded in the regular sequence are usually easily detected, with some important exceptions. Participants’ ability to identify the target in the rapid sequence increases monotonically as a function of position in the series, from about 70% for position 2 to above 90% for position eight, after which performance asymptotes (Ariga and Yokosawa, 2008; Ambinder and Lleras, 2009). This increase in performance as a function of position in the stream has been labeled “attentional awakening” to indicate that temporal attention to the sequence is becoming entrained to the rhythm of the RSVP, as the stream unfolds.…”
Section: Entrainment Of Temporal Attentionmentioning
confidence: 99%