Sex differences in the duration of visual attention

Normal adult males and females looked at a series of photographs containing either a single adult male or female. Ss viewed each picture for as long as they wished. Assuming that measures of the duration of attention would reflect Ss attraction for the opposite sex, it was hypothesized that Ss would spend relatively more time viewing photographs of the opposite sex. The results failed to support the hypothesis. Although males did not differentially attend to the stimuli, females looked significantly longer at the females than they did at the males. The results were interpreted in terms of the “overt sexual content” of the stimuli and socially conditioned attentiveness and inattentiveness.     

Sex differences in the duration of visual attention

Normal adult males and females looked at a series of photographs containing either a single adult male or female. Ss viewed each picture for as long as they wished. Assuming that measures of the duration of attention would reflect Ss attraction for the opposite sex, it was hypothesized that Ss would spend relatively more time viewing photographs of the opposite sex. The results failed to support the hypothesis. Although males did not differentially attend to the stimuli, females looked significantly longer at the females than they did at the males. The results were interpreted in terms of the “overt sexual content” of the stimuli and socially conditioned attentiveness and inattentiveness.     

Further experiments on movement masking

Voluntary attention to one of two static objects in the peripheral field of one eye makes this object more liable to masking by a moving object in the corresponding area of the field of the other eye (Experiment 1).

Positive after images (and probably negative after images) are subject to (binocular) movement masking (Experiment 2).

Movement masking can occur in the field of either eye, but with the displays so far tried the inhibitory influence of a moving object is less in the field of the eye to which it is shown than in the field of the other eye (Experiment 3).     

Oculomotor adaptation to wedge prisms with no part of the body seen

When S looks at a visual target through prisms, adaptive shifts in reaching behavior occur even though he sees no part of his body through the prisms. These shifts are caused by a change in the judgment of the direction of gaze (oculomotor change), which in turn is caused by two secondary prismatic effects: (a) asymmetry of the visual display and (b) apparent rotation about a vertical axis of a panel or wall facing S. The “asymmetry” factor contributes 22% of the total oculomotor change, and the “rotation” effect contributes the remaining 78%. Oculomotor change is not facilitated by eye-movzment activity. The adaptive oculomotor change induces a non-adaptive proprioception change about one-tenth as large as the oculomotor change. These findings are capable of accounting for the previously unexplained results reported by Wooster in 1923, and also for the current controversy about the role of reafferent stimulation in sensorymotor adaptation.