Attention 1&2

Question 1

Attention is

Answer 1

Goal oriented

Question 2

Attention varies in

Answer 2

Effort

Question 3

Pop out search tends to be

Answer 3

Very easy

Question 4

Serial search tends to be

Answer 4

Much harder

Question 5

Attention can be

Answer 5

Shifted and zoomed

Question 6

Attention is selective

Answer 6

And acts as a filter

Question 7

Attention is limited

Answer 7

And acts as a resource, such as “amount of attention” or “paying attention)

Question 8

Attention can be captured

Answer 8

You control your attention, but only to a degree

Question 9

Attention can be divided

Answer 9

For example between modalities, you can divide your attention between two things

Question 10

Broadbent wanted to know

Answer 10

Can we understand two simultaneous messages

Question 11

Broadbent’s results

Answer 11

Only about 50% of questions were answered correctly, when listening to two simultaneous questions

Question 12

Cocktail party problem

Answer 12

How do we recognize what one person is saying when others are speaking at the same time?

Question 13

Cherry- condition 1

Answer 13

Two messages played in two ears, and repeat one message and ignore the other

Question 14

Cherry- condition 1 result

Answer 14

Task is difficult but possible after many repetitions

Question 15

Cherry- condition 2; dichotic listening

Answer 15

Two messages by the same speaker simultaneously played to different ears and instructed to shadow one speaker

Question 16

Conclusions from these attention experiments

Answer 16

Hard to attend to two messages that are not separable by physical cues, and with physical cues it is much easier, and we can attend to one message and know very little about the other one

Question 17

Broadbent’s filter theory

Answer 17

Senses -> short term store -> selective filter -> limited capacity channel

Question 18

Broadbent’s filter theory

Answer 18

Senses -> short term store -> selective filter -> limited capacity channel

Question 19

Short term memory store

Answer 19

Where information from multiple sensory inputs enters

Question 20

Simple physical stimulus properties are processed

Answer 20

In parallel

Question 21

Selective filter

Answer 21

Identifies info for further processing and uses physical stimulus properties as the basis for selection

Question 22

The limited capacity channel

Answer 22

Is a serial processor; current term is the focus of attention in working memory

Question 23

Selective filtering takes place before

Answer 23

Full meaning analysis can occur in the limited capacity channel

Question 24

Own name effect

Answer 24

Evidence against early selection; 1/3 participants noticed own name when presented to irrelevant ear which shows it’s possible to recognize words without processing their meaning

Question 25

The own name effect suggests that the

Answer 25

Presumably unattended info was analyzed which isn’t consistent with early selection theory

Question 26

Message switching

Answer 26

Participants report info from irrelevant ear when messages switch from ear to ear, evidence against early selection

Question 27

Conditioning with electrical shocks

Answer 27

Words affect skin conductance responses and this shows that this isn’t consistent with early selection theory

Question 28

Alternatives to broadbent’s filter theory

Answer 28

Attenuation theory and late selection

Question 29

Attentuation theory

Answer 29

That the filter is not completely selective and explains for failures of early selection

Question 30

Late selection

Answer 30

Meaning is analyzed before input is filtered automatically and not capacity limited

Question 31

Leakage

Answer 31

Filter doesn’t block info from irrelevant channel but it does attenuate it and info from irrelevant channel leaks through the filter

Question 32

Slippage

Answer 32

If attention isn’t properly focused, then attention will slip to the irrelevant channel

Question 33

Spillover

Answer 33

If the relevant channel needs less attention than that available, attention will spill over to the irrelevant channel

Question 34

Lachter et al study shows that

Answer 34

Broadbent might have been incorrect

Question 35

Irrelevant channel

Answer 35

Is only irrelevant based on instruction

Question 36

Own name effect and working memory capacity conclusions

Answer 36

those with a low working memory capacity are more likely to let attention slip into the irrelevant channel and those with high working memory capacity are better able to control attention

Question 37

Channel switching experiment

Answer 37

Listening to two messages at the same time

Question 38

Channel switching experiment shows that

Answer 38

Subjects get confused when a semantically coherent message suddenly became incoherent and to resolve this confusion subjects reallocate attention

Question 39

Replicating electric shock conditioning

Answer 39

Attempted to replicate findings that skin conductance changes, which was found, but only in subjects who failed to shadow relevant channel and recalled info from irrelevant channel

Question 40

Replicating electric shock conditioning study suggests

Answer 40

There might be slippage of attentional resources and some participants do attend the irrelevant channel

Question 41

Lachter et al hypothesis

Answer 41

If we can exclude slippage there will be no identification without attention

Question 42

How did Lachter et al. exclude slippage in the repetition priming experiment

Answer 42

Used visual stimuli and present relevant and irrelevant stimuli in different locations, and presented the stimuli in irrelevant locations very briefly

Question 43

How did the methods Lachter et al. used exclude slippage

Answer 43

Shifts of attention need time and it’s not possible to shift attention to an irrelevant location in 55 ms

Question 44

How does repetition priming work

Answer 44

Seeing the prime activates the concept in memory, it then becomes easier to indicate that the target CAT is a word

Question 45

When repetition priming is presented different locations

Answer 45

The reactions were slower

Question 46

Lachter et al. Results for same location

Answer 46

Where the prime was in the same location then reaction times were faster and slower when in different locations

Question 47

Relation to the prime and target

Answer 47

Faster when the prime and target are the same, slower when the prime and target were different

Question 48

Lachter et al possible results for different location possible outcome 1

Answer 48

The same prime in different locations doesn’t affect reaction times and reaction times are the same

Question 49

Lachter et al possible results for different locations possible outcome 2

Answer 49

Same prime in different location does affect reaction times and there is a speeded response

Question 50

Lachter et al interpretation of possible results possible outcome 1

Answer 50

Broadbent is correct and there is no identification without attention. Therefore, the same prime in different location doesn’t affect reaction times

Question 51

Kouider et al study

Answer 51

Training with auditory stimuli left hand response if word is an animal right hand response if word is man made object, and during sleep presented with new untrained words

Question 52

Kouider et al study result

Answer 52

Participants prepared response in their sleep shown through electroencephalography

Question 53

Kouider et al implications

Answer 53

They must have understood the meaning of the words and there is identification without attention in auditory domain

Question 54

Lavie argued that perceptual processing is ___ which is an assumption from late selection theory but that perceptual processing is ___ which is an assumption from early selection theory

Answer 54

Automatic; capacity limited

Question 55

Lavie assumption

Answer 55

Identification of irrelevant stimuli only if processing of relevant stimuli doesn’t exhaust available sources, and if processing of relevant stimuli consumed all available resources then there is no identification of irrelevant stimuli

Question 56

Lavie & Cox experiment

Answer 56

Subjects were asked to identify a target letter while an irrelevant letter was presented, and the trials differed where the target and flanker were either identical or different

Question 57

Lavie and Cox hypothesis

Answer 57

Compatibility effect for low perceptual load trials, but not high perceptual load trials

Question 58

Compatibility effect

Answer 58

Difference in reaction times between incompatible trials and compatible trials

Question 59

Lavie and Cox result

Answer 59

In low perceptual load there was a large compatibility effect and this suggests that the letter in the irrelevant channel was processed

Question 60

Lavie and Cox conclusion

Answer 60

With high perceptual load, info in irrelevant channel is not identified, with low perceptual load, info in relevant channel is identified

Question 61

Difference between Lachter and Lavie

Answer 61

Lachter believed results explained by slippage to irrelevant channel, which Lavie believed results explained by spillover of attentional resources from relevant to irrelevant channel