Previous attentional set can induce an attentional blink with task-irrelevant initial targets

Identification of a second target is often impaired by the requirement to process a prior target in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP). This is termed the attentional blink. Even when the first target is task irrelevant an attentional blink may occur providing this first target shares similar features with the second target (contingent capture). An RSVP experiment was undertaken to assess whether this first target can still cause an attentional blink when it did not require a response and did not share any features with the following target. The results revealed that such task-irrelevant targets can induce an attentional blink providing that they were task relevant on a previous block of trials. This suggests that irrelevant focal stimuli can distract attention on the basis of a previous attentional set.     

No commonality between attentional capture and attentional blink

Visual search for a unique target is impaired when a salient distractor is presented (attentional capture). This phenomenon is said to occur because attention is diverted to a distractor before it reaches the target. Similarly, perception of the second of two targets embedded in a rapid stream of nontargets is impaired, suggesting attentional deprivation due to the processing of the first target (attentional blink). We examined whether these phenomena emerge from a common underlying attentional mechanism by using correlation studies. If these phenomena share a common foundation, the magnitude of these deficits should show within-subject correlations. Participants (N?=?135) revealed significant attentional deficits during spatial and temporal capture and the attentional blink tasks. However, no significant correlation was found among these tasks. Experiment 2 (N?=?95) replicated this finding using the same procedure as that used in Experiment 1 but included another attentional blink task that required spatial switching between the two targets. Strong correlations emerged only between the two attentional blink tasks (with/without spatial switching). The present results suggest that attentional deficits during spatial and temporal capture and the attentional blink tasks reflect different aspects of attention.     

Blink and shrink: the effect of the attentional blink on spatial processing

The detection or discrimination of the second of 2 targets in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) task is often temporarily impaired-a phenomenon termed the attentional blink. This study demonstrated that the attentional blink also affects localization performance. Spatial cues pointed out the possible target positions in a subsequent visual search display. When cues were presented inside an attentional blink (as induced by an RSVP task), the observers' capacity to use them was reduced. This effect was not due to attention being highly focused, to general task switching costs, or to complete unawareness of the cues. Instead, the blink induced a systematic localization bias toward the fovea, reflecting what appears to be spatial compression.     

Phonological encoding in the attentional blink paradigm

The attentional blink refers to a deficit in reporting a second target that follows a first target within a few hundred milliseconds, when both targets occur in a sequence of distractors shown serially at rates of about 10 items per second. In four experiments, phonological similarity of post-Target 1 distractors impaired dual target report within the interval in which the attentional blink occurs. Similarity of letter targets had a smaller, less reliable effect on performance. Phonological similarity of letter distractors did not affect single target identification (Experiment 3), but it continued to impair dual target report (Experiment 5), even when the targets belonged to a different category—namely, digits. The results demonstrated that, not only targets, but also distractors are encoded phonologically, despite the fact that distractors are irrelevant and never have to be reported.     

New objects,not new features,trigger the attentional blink

When two different targets must be selected from a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) of images, perception of the second target will be markedly reduced if it is presented within about a half second of the first. Known as the attentional blink (AB), this effect reflects temporal limitations in attentional processes enabling awareness of image representations. I tested whether these limitations occur at an object or feature level of processing by presenting (in RSVP) multiple images of the same (old) object depicted in different orientations. Targets were defined by new features added either to this or to a new object. When the first target feature appeared on the old object, no AB effects were found even when the second target was a new object. When a new object carried the first target feature, an AB effect was found even when the second target feature appeared on the same "new" object. The AB appears to reflect limitations in the creation of new object representations, rather than temporal limitations of awareness per se.     

Resting EEG in alpha and beta bands predicts individual differences in attentional blink magnitude

Accuracy for a second target (T2) is reduced when it is presented within 500 ms of a first target (T1) in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) - an attentional blink (AB). There are reliable individual differences in the magnitude of the AB. Recent evidence has shown that the attentional approach that an individual typically adopts during a task or in anticipation of a task, as indicated by various measures, predicts individual differences in the AB deficit. It has yet to be observed whether indices of attentional approach when not engaged in a goal-directed task are also relevant to individual differences in the AB. The current studies investigated individual differences in the AB by examining their relationship with attention at rest using quantitative measures of EEG. Greater levels of alpha at rest were associated with larger AB magnitudes, where greater levels of beta at rest were associated with smaller AB magnitudes. Furthermore, individuals with more beta than alpha demonstrated a smaller AB effect than individuals with more alpha than beta. Our results suggest that greater attentional engagement at rest, when not engaged in a goal-directed task, is associated with smaller AB magnitudes.     

An attentional blink for sequentially presented targets: Evidence in favor of resource depletion accounts

Several accounts of the attentional blink (AB) have postulated that this dual-target deficit occurs because of limited-capacity attentional resources being devoted to processing the first target at the expense of the second (resource depletion accounts; e.g., Chun & Potter, 1995). Recent accounts have challenged this model (e.g., Di Lollo, Kawahara, Ghorashi, & Enns, 2005; Olivers, van der Stigchel, & Hulleman, 2007), proposing instead that the AB occurs because of subjects’ inability to maintain appropriate levels of attentional control when targets are separated by distractors. Accordingly, the AB is eliminated when three targets from the same attentional set are presented sequentially in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) stream. However, under such conditions poorer identification of the first target is typically observed, hinting at a potential trade-off between the first and subsequent target performances. Consistent with this hypothesis, the present study shows that an AB is observed for successive targets from the same attentional set in an RSVP stream when the first target powerfully captures attention. These results suggest that resource depletion contributes significantly to the AB.     

No commonality between attentional capture and attentional blink

Visual search for a unique target is impaired when a salient distractor is presented (attentional capture). This phenomenon is said to occur because attention is diverted to a distractor before it reaches the target. Similarly, perception of the second of two targets embedded in a rapid stream of nontargets is impaired, suggesting attentional deprivation due to the processing of the first target (attentional blink). We examined whether these phenomena emerge from a common underlying attentional mechanism by using correlation studies. If these phenomena share a common foundation, the magnitude of these deficits should show within-subject correlations. Participants (N = 135) revealed significant attentional deficits during spatial and temporal capture and the attentional blink tasks. However, no significant correlation was found among these tasks. Experiment 2 (N = 95) replicated this finding using the same procedure as that used in Experiment 1 but included another attentional blink task that required spatial switching between the two targets. Strong correlations emerged only between the two attentional blink tasks (with/without spatial switching). The present results suggest that attentional deficits during spatial and temporal capture and the attentional blink tasks reflect different aspects of attention.     

Modulation of the attentional blink by differential resource allocation.

When one masked target (T2) follows another (T1) in close temporal proximity, identification accuracy of the second target is reduced for a period referred to as the attentional blink. Analysis of the attentional blink literature suggests that increasing the difficulty of T1 processing increases the magnitude of the blink. In a previous study that eliminated several untoward features of the typical attentional blink design (e.g., task switching, location switching, and stream contribution), we found no effect on blink magnitude when three levels of T1 difficulty (manipulated in a data-limited manner) were randomly intermixed. Here, when we repeated the previous study using a blocked manipulation of T1 difficulty, which is characteristic of the literature, a significant positive relation between T1 difficulty and blink magnitude was found. Resource allocation put in place to encode T1 in advance of a dual-target trial thus seems to be the critical factor in mediating this relation.     

On the saliency of negative stimuli: Evidence from attentional blink1

Abstract: When people are asked to detect two targets from a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) stream, impairment of recognition of the second target (T2) can be observed if the T2 is presented several hundred milliseconds later than the first target (T1). This phenomenon is known as attentional blink, and is considered to reflect some temporal characteristic of the attentional process. The aim of the present study was to use the attentional blink paradigm to examine whether the affective meaning of the stimuli could affect the magnitude of attentional blink. In Experiment 1, the valence of the T2 (neutral, positive, and negative) was manipulated. Significant T2 detection deficit was observed with neutral and positive T2 but not with negative T2. Experiment 2 demonstrated that non‐significant attentional blink in negative T2 in Experiment 1 could be attributed to the negative affective meaning of T2. Results are discussed in terms of the high saliency of negative information.     

Relationships between attentional blink magnitude, RSVP target accuracy, and performance on other cognitive tasks

When two masked, to-be-attended targets are presented within approximately half a second of each other, performance on the second target (T2) suffers, relative to when the targets are presented further apart in time or when the first target (T1) can be ignored. This pattern of results is known as the attentional blink (AB). Typically, participants differ with respect to the magnitude of their AB and their overall target accuracy. Despite investigations as to what participant characteristics may influence AB performance (e.g., age, brain damage, or mood state), there has been no focused examination of whether individual differences in cognitive performance measures predict the magnitude of the AB or overall rapid serial visual presentation(RSVP) target accuracy. Our university studentparticipants performed single-target and dual-target RSVP tasks, as well as a selection of cognitive tasks that did not use RSVP presentations, with color, letter, digit, and object stimuli. Overall performance on each of the RSVP targets (T1, T2, and single target) was predicted by speeded manual and vocal identification times to isolated stimuli and by performance with other RSVP targets. However, the magnitude of the AB was predicted only by T1 accuracy, not by any other performance measures. The results suggest that individual differences in AB magnitude do not result from differences in effective RSVP target encoding and are not well explained by varied information-processing abilities.     

Emotional facial expressions and the attentional blink: Attenuated blink for angry and happy faces irrespective of social anxiety

Although facial information is distributed over spatial as well as temporal domains, thus far research on selective attention to disapproving faces has concentrated predominantly on the spatial domain. This study examined the temporal characteristics of visual attention towards facial expressions by presenting a Rapid Serial Visual Presentation (RSVP) paradigm to high (n=33) and low (n=34) socially anxious women. Neutral letter stimuli (p, q, d, b) were presented as the first target (T1), and emotional faces (neutral, happy, angry) as the second target (T2). Irrespective of social anxiety, the attentional blink was attenuated for emotional faces. Emotional faces as T2 did not influence identification accuracy of a preceding (neutral) target. The relatively low threshold for the (explicit) identification of emotional expressions is consistent with the view that emotional facial expressions are processed relatively efficiently.     

Attentional capture triggers an attentional blink

Two experiments examined the possibility that attention directed to a distractor during rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) can produce an attentional blink (AB). A to-be-ignored distractor (D1) preceded a target word (T2) by a variable lag in RSVP streams of black false-font distractors. D1 was highlighted by color and was a word, a string of consonants, a string of digits, or a string of false-font characters. Recall of T2 was significantly suppressed at short D1-T2 lags (the AB) but only when D1 contained letters; the AB was completely absent when D1 was composed of digits or false-font characters. Thus, the AB can be triggered by a highlighted distractor if the distractor shares features with a target.     

Short-term memory and the attentional blink: Capacity versus content

When people monitor the rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) of stimuli for two targets (T1 and T2), they often miss T2 if it falls into a time window of about half a second after T1 onset, a phenomenon known as the attentional blink (AB). We found that overall performance in an RSVP task was impaired by a concurrent short-term memory (STM) task and, furthermore, that this effect increased when STM load was higher and when its content was more task relevant. Loading visually defined stimuli and adding articulatory suppression further impaired performance on the RSVP task, but the size of the AB over time (i.e., T1-T2 lag) remained unaffected by load or content. This suggested that at least part of the performance in an RSVP task reflects interference between competing codes within STM, as interference models have held, whereas the AB proper reflects capacity limitations in the transfer to STM, as consolidation models have claimed.     

Top-down control settings and the attentional blink: Evidence for nonspatial contingent capture

Previous studies have shown that spatial attention can be “captured” by irrelevant events, but only if the eliciting stimulus matches top-down attentional control settings. Here we explore whether similar principles hold for nonspatial attentional selection. Subjects searched for a coloured target letter embedded in an RSVP stream of letters inside a box centred on fixation. On critical trials, a distractor, consisting of a brief change in the colour of the box, occurred at various temporal lags prior to the target. In Experiment 1, the distractor produced a decrement in target detection, but only when it matched the target colour. Experiments 2 and 3 provide evidence that this effect does not reflect masking or the dispersion of spatial attention. The results establish that (1) nonspatial selection is subject to “capture”, (2) such capture is contingent on top-down attentional control settings, and (3) control settings for nonspatial capture can vary in specificity.     

The time course of semantic and associative priming effects is different in an attentional blink task

When two targets are presented using rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) and the interval between the targets is 200–500 ms, report of the second target is impaired, a phenomena known as the attentional blink (AB). This study examined the time course of semantic-only and associate–semantic priming effects during an AB task. Three RSVP experiments were conducted using targets that shared either a semantic-only or an associative–semantic relationship. The results of the three experiments demonstrated semantic-only priming effects at the shortest stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs). Associative–semantic priming was evident at shorter and longer SOAs. This suggests that priming in an AB task is driven by conceptual overlap facilitating lexical access at short SOAs and with longer SOAs lexical access benefits from word associations links between targets.     

Identification of angry faces in the attentional blink

According to cognitive and neural theories of emotion, attentional processing of innate threat stimuli, such as angry facial expressions, is prioritised over neutral stimuli. To test this hypothesis, the present study used a modified version of the rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) paradigm to investigate the effect of emotional face stimuli on the attentional blink (AB). The target stimuli were schematic faces which depicted threatening (angry), positive or neutral facial expressions. Results showed that performance accuracy was enhanced (i.e., the AB was reduced) on trials in which the second target was an angry face, rather than a neutral face. Results extend previous research by demonstrating that angry faces reduce the AB, and that this effect is found for schematic facial expressions. These findings further support the proposal that, when there is competition for attentional resources, threat stimuli are given higher priority in processing compared with non-threatening stimuli.     

Right visual-field advantage in the attentional blink: Asymmetry in attentional gating across time and space

When two targets are presented in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP), recognition of the second target (T2) is usually reduced when presented 150–500 ms after the first target, demonstrating an attentional blink (AB). Previous studies have shown a left visual-field (LVF) advantage in T2 recognition, when T2 was embedded in one of two streams, demanding top-down attention for its recognition. Here, we explored the impact of bottom-up saliency on spatial asymmetry in the AB. When T2 was spatially shifted outside from the RSVP, creating an abrupt onset of T2, right T2s showed a right visual-field (RVF) advantage. In lag-1 trials, right T2s were not only better recognized, but also showed a low T1-T2 order error rate. In contrast, recognized left T2s exhibited high order error rate. Without abrupt onset, symmetrical AB was found and order error rate was similarly low in both sides. Follow-up experiments showed that, while RVF advantage was related to bottom-up saliency, order errors were affected by T1 mask. The discrepancy between LVF and RVF advantage in the AB could be resolved in terms of two mechanisms of attentional gating: top-down attentional gating, which is biased towards LVF, and bottom-up attentional gating, which is biased towards RVF.     

The more your mind wanders,the smaller your attentional blink: An individual differences study

The present studies investigate the hypothesis that individuals who frequently report experiencing episodes of mind wandering do so because they under-invest attentional/executive resources in the external environment. Here we examined whether self-reported instances of mind wandering predict the magnitude of the “attentional blink” (AB) in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) task, since a prominent view is that the AB derives from an over-investment of attention in the information stream. Study 1 demonstrates that subjective reports of mind wandering in a sustained attention task have a negative predictive relation with respect to the magnitude of the AB measured in a subsequent RSVP task. In addition, using the Spontaneous and Deliberate Mind Wandering Questionnaire in Study 2, we were again able to show that trait-level mind wandering in everyday life negatively predicts AB magnitude. We suggest that mind wandering may be the behavioural outcome of an adaptive cognitive style intended to maximize the efficient processing of dynamic and temporally unpredictable events.