lecture 5- automatic and controlled attention Flashcards
what are the properties of automatic processing?
- fast, parallel (number of processes can happen at once)
- requires little effort
- no capacity demands (can make task harder, but doesn’t influence performance)
- may arise/develop through extensive practice
- no real call on coscious attention
- difficult to control- stimulus-driven (inevitable), once you start can’t stop
what are the properties of controlled processing?
- slower, serial processing- have to do one after another
- effortful
- dependent on capacity demands- high demands (harder) = low performance
- can be changed quickly
- controlled- dependent on control processes within the brain (PFC and surrounding areas- executive parts)
what was Schneider & Shiffrin’s task?
- examines difference between automatic and controlled processing
- P’s presented with items in a memory set (set of frames with one memory set = one trial)
- presented with 20 frames
- each frame contains 2 or more items (distractors and/or targets)
- and then asked to search for them in a number of frames with distractors
- say if memory set items were present or not
- 2 conditions: variable (for controlled processing) or consistent mapping (for automatic processing)
- DVs: accuracy and RT
what is meant by the consistent mapping and variable mapping conditions?
- consistent: items in memory set were not used as distractors in frames across whole experiement (in other trials)
numbers = target, consonant = distractors -> target is consistently different in nature to distractors - variable: items to be remembered in one trial can be used as distractors in the frames in other trials
‘t’ is distractor in one trial and then target in another
what were the results with consistent mapping?
- no real effect of number of items in memory set
- number of items in frames had no effect on RT
- change in capacity demands = no change in performace
what were the results with variable mapping?
- number of items in memory set increased RT
- so did number of items in frames
- performance affected by memory load and perceptual load
- increase demand on capacity = reduced performance
- consistent mapping much quicker than variable -> 2 attentional processes going on (fast automatic and slow controlled)
how do consistent/variable mapping match with automatic/controlled processing?
- consistent mapping -> automatic processing (quick, happens in parallel, no capacity demands)
- variable mapping -> controlled processing (slow, processing dependent on capacity)
what did Shiffrin & Schneider (1977) find about training?
- split consonants into 2 groups- B to L and Q to Z
- consistent mapping: one group used for memory sets and one for distractors
- variable: used both groups for memory sets and distractors in different trials
- after 2100 trials with consistent mapping = performance no longer influenced by difficulty (independent of item numbers in memory and frame sets)
- then switched role of groups (B to L went from meory to distractor), initial performance very bad, then slowly got to same point as 1500 trials in first time after 2400 trials
what was found about training and automatic processing?
- automatic processing is hard to learn and harder to unlearn (slower learning in second run)
- controlled processes are open to control, automatic processes are beyind control
what was found with dual tasks?
- individuals can learn to do two things at once
- intially impossible but 6 weeks of practice lead to competence (Spelke, Hirst & Neisser 1976)
- writing to diction became automatic
what the elements of Posner’s spatial curing task?
- peripheral vs. central- central arrow or cross tat edge
- valid or invalid- is the prediction by the cue correct?
- informative or uninformative- is prediction correct a lot of the time or rarely? can you rely on it?
- cue target delay- cue target onset asynchronicity or stimulus onset asynchronicity? -> gap between cue disappearing and target appearing
what is the validity effect by the posner cueing paradigm?
- difference between invalid and valid cues’ RTs
- if faster for valid- tells us if cues are being used
- if invalid - valid RT is positive = p’s focused on where target will appear- following cues
- is 0 = p’s not focused on where target will appear- not following cues
- if negative = p’s are focused away from where target will appear- odd!!!
what did data from the posner’s spatial curing task look like?
informative cues-
- peripheral seems automatic response
- central not (p’s have to interpret)
uninformative cues-
- peripheral cuing still occurring in shorter gaps (automatic response- cue is unhelpful but still captures attention, still validity effect)
- central controlled (p’s realise cues are not useful so ignore- no cuing really)
how do we infer automaticity from validity effects?
- if validity effect is there, p’s are following the cue
- but in the uninformative cue conditions, the cue doesn’t tell where the target is
- so they shouldn’t really use it
- but in peripherals they still follow the cue (at short cue target delays)
- p’s can’t stop attentional focus changing
what is Posner’s model?
- attention is spotlight, spotlight is focused on the fixation
on cuing:
1. spotlight disengages from fixation spot
2. spotlight moves to cued spot
3. attention is focused on that spot - if cue is valid- spotlight is on target when it appears (so fast RT)
- if cue is invalid- have to repeat steps which slows response
what are the differences between central and peripheral cueing?
central:
- slower
- seems to be under conscious control (can ignore cue when aren’t any use)
- need interpreting (where arrow is pointing to)
- CONTROLLED process as can focus spotlight
peripheral:
- fast
- not under conscious control (cues still cue when not reliable)
- seems to be driven by stimulus
- AUTOMATIC process
but not as simple as that- some things automatically grab attnetion (faces)
what is the new distinction of types of attention?
endogenous:
- top-down conscious allocation of attention
- effortful and interpretive
- controlled or modulated by goals and context
- voluntary
exogenous
- bottom-up allocation of attention
- controlled by external events
- reflexive
- involuntary- attention is captured
what is inhibition of return?
- with peripheral uninformative cues, initially there is a validity effect
- but at target delays longer than 200ms, becomes reverse (uncused targets are quicker)
- cued targets increases RT
- after a certain amount of time, attention drifts away to uncued side, then brought back to cued
- slow to come back -> inhibition of return
- as if don’t find something where cue directs, makes sense to look elsewhere
- spotlight moves on and its return is inhibited (already looked there)
what are some other automatic cues?
- eye gaze (cartoon)- validity effect for non-informative central cue at 100ms, persists over cue target delay (AUTOMATIC)
- real faces- validity only really at 700ms for uninformative central cue, may be as judgement task (not just straight automatic) so extral level of complexity
- appearence of face may capture attention before gaze cues- when got used to face validity effect was at 300ms
- when cues were counter-indications of locations, still validity effect at 300ms but opposite at 700ms as start to control focus
what study did Ristic (2000) carry out?
- use of eye cue and arrow cues on children
- found validity effects for both eye gaze and arrows
- evidence automaticity with central ‘symbolic’ cue
- but no inhibition of return, so don’t behave like automatic peripheral cues
what do cueing tasks show?
- peripheral cues do seem to be automatically directing (not in a straight way)
- central cues can be used to direct attention in a voluntary fashion and can automatically control attention when cues are biologically primed/have social significance
-> ‘automatic symbolic orienting’
what are the defining features of automatic attnetional control?
- inevitable evocation
- incorrigible completion
- efficient execution
- parallel processing
how automatic a process is is dependent on how much each contributes
what was the final model proposed by Kahneman & Treisman (1984)
- perhaps may be graduations of automaticity
- perceptual processing strongly automatic if neither facilitated by focusing or impaired by diversion on/from a stimulus
- partially automatic if normally completed when attention is diverted from the stimulus, but can be facilitated by attention
- occasionally automatic if generally requires attention, but can sometimes be completed without it
