Implicit sequence learning in a search task

This study investigated the effects of selection demands on implicit sequence learning. Participants in a search condition looked for a target among seven distractors and responded on the target identity. The responses followed a deterministic sequence, and sequence learning was compared to that found in two control conditions in which the targets were presented alone, either at a central location or over a series of unpredictable locations. Sequence learning was obtained in all conditions, and it was equivalent for the two variable location conditions, regardless of the perceptual demands. Larger effects of learning were observed in the central location, both on the indirect measures and on the measures taken from a cued-generation task. The expression of learning decreased selectively in this condition when the sequence validity was reduced over a test block. These results are consistent with the claims that implicit and explicit learning are mixed in this central condition and that implicit learning is not affected by selection difficulty.     

Voluntary and involuntary attention have different consequences: The effect of perceptual difficulty

We propose that voluntary and involuntary attention affect different mechanisms and have different consequences for performance measured in reaction time. Voluntary attention enhances the perceptual representation whereas involuntary attention affects the tendency to respond to stimuli in one location or another. In a spatial-cueing paradigm, we manipulated perceptual difficulty and compared voluntary and involuntary attention. For the voluntary-attention condition, the spatial cue was predictive of the target location, whereas in the involuntary-attention condition it was not. Increasing perceptual difficulty increased the attention effect with voluntary attention, but decreased it with involuntary attention. Thus voluntary and involuntary attention have different consequences when perceptual difficulty is manipulated and hence are probably caused by different mechanisms.     

Training with anxiety has a positive effect on expert perceptual–motor performance under pressure

In two experiments, we examined whether training with anxiety can prevent choking in experts performing perceptual–motor tasks. In Experiment 1, 17 expert basketball players practised free throws over a 5-week period with or without induced anxiety. Only after training with anxiety did performance no longer deteriorate during the anxiety posttest. In Experiment 2, 17 expert dart players practised dart throwing from a position high or low on a climbing wall, thus with or without anxiety. Again, only after training with anxiety was performance maintained during the anxiety posttest, despite higher levels of anxiety, heart rate, and perceived effort. It is concluded that practising under anxiety can prevent choking in expert perceptual–motor performance, as one acclimatizes to the specific processes accompanying anxiety.     

Goal relevance and artificial grammar learning

This investigation used a newly developed artificial grammar learning (AGL) paradigm in which participants were exposed to sequences of stimuli that varied in two dimensions (colours and letters) that were superimposed on each other. Variation within each dimension was determined by a different grammar. The results of two studies strongly suggest that implicit learning in AGL depends on the goal relevance of the to-be-learned dimension. Specifically, when only one of the two stimulus dimensions was relevant for their task (Experiment 1) participants learned the structure underlying the relevant, but not that of the irrelevant dimension. However, when both dimensions were relevant, both structures were learned (Experiment 2). These findings suggest that implicit learning occurs only in dimensions to which we are attuned. Based on the present results and on those of Eitam, Hassin, and Schul (2008) we suggest that focusing on goal relevance may provide new insights into the mechanisms underlying implicit learning.     

Gaze and arrow distractors influence saccade trajectories similarly

Perceiving someone's averted eye-gaze is thought to result in an automatic shift of attention and in the preparation of an oculomotor response in the direction of perceived gaze. Although gaze cues have been regarded as being special in this respect, recent studies have found evidence for automatic attention shifts with nonsocial stimuli, such as arrow cues. Here, we directly compared the effects of social and nonsocial cues on eye movement preparation by examining the modulation of saccade trajectories made in the presence of eye-gaze, arrows, or peripheral distractors. At a short stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between the distractor and the target, saccades deviated towards the direction of centrally presented arrow distractors, but away from the peripheral distractors. No significant trajectory deviations were found for gaze distractors. At the longer SOA, saccades deviated away from the direction of the distractor for all three distractor types, but deviations were smaller for the centrally presented gaze and arrow distractors. These effects were independent of whether line-drawings or photos of faces were used and could not be explained by differences in the spatial properties of the peripheral distractor. The results suggest that all three types of distractors (gaze, arrow, peripheral) can induce the automatic programming of an eye movement. Moreover, the findings suggest that gaze and arrow distractors affect oculomotor preparation similarly, whereas peripheral distractors, which are classically regarded as eliciting an automatic shift of attention and an oculomotor response, induce a stronger and faster acting influence on response preparation and the corresponding inhibition of that response.     

Trial after trial: General processing consequences as a function of repetition and change in multidimensional sound

While there are pointers relating to the consequences of repetition, a general framework regarding the cognitive implications of processing multidimensional stimuli as a function of previous stimulus history is currently lacking. Three experiments using sounds varying in location and pitch were carried out, in which the immediate consequences of repeating or changing task-relevant and task-irrelevant attributes were orthogonally examined. A consistent pattern of data was shown, in that the magnitude of selective attention failure was larger when the task-relevant value repeated across trials, while differences between dimensions were larger when the task-relevant value changed across trials. These effects of irrelevance and dimension as a function of intertrial contingency are summarized in a model depicting the dynamic allocation of processing resource.     

When motor attention improves selective attention: The dissociating role of saliency

There is evidence that preparing and maintaining a motor plan (“motor attention”) can bias visual selective attention. For example, a motor attended grasp biases visual attention to select appropriately graspable object features (Symes, Tucker, Ellis, Vainio, & Ottoboni, 2008). According to the biased competition model of selective attention, the relative weightings of stimulus-driven and goal-directed factors determine selection. The current study investigated how the goal-directed bias of motor attention might operate when the stimulus-driven salience of the target was varied. Using a change detection task, two almost identical photographed scenes of simplistic graspable objects were presented flickering back and forth. The target object changed visually, and this change was either high or low salience. Target salience determined whether or not the motor attended grasp significantly biased visual selective attention. Specifically, motor attention only had a reliable influence on target detection times when the visual salience of the target was low.     

Is “Inhibition of Return” due to the inhibition of the return of attention?

Inhibition of Return (IOR) is usually explained in terms of orienting–reorienting of attention, emphasizing an underlying mechanism that inhibits the return of attention to previously selected locations. Recent data challenge this explanation to the extent that the IOR effect is observed at the location where attention is oriented to, where no reorienting of attention is needed. To date, these studies have involved endogenous attentional selection of attention and thus indicate a dissociation between the voluntary attention of spatial attention and the IOR effect. The present work demonstrates a dissociation between the involuntary orienting of spatial attention and the IOR effect. We combined nonpredictive peripheral cues with nonpredictive central orienting cues (either arrows or gaze). The IOR effect was observed to operate independent of involuntary spatial orienting. These data speak against the “reorienting hypothesis” of IOR. We suggest an alternative explanation whereby the IOR effect reflects a cost in detecting a new event (the target) at the location where another event (a cue) was coded before.     

The role of visual spatial attention in adult developmental dyslexia

The present study investigated the nature of visual spatial attention deficits in adults with developmental dyslexia, using a partial report task with five-letter, digit, and symbol strings. Participants responded by a manual key press to one of nine alternatives, which included other characters in the string, allowing an assessment of position errors as well as intrusion errors. The results showed that the dyslexic adults performed significantly worse than age-matched controls with letter and digit strings but not with symbol strings. Both groups produced W-shaped serial position functions with letter and digit strings. The dyslexics' deficits with letter string stimuli were limited to position errors, specifically at the string-interior positions 2 and 4. These errors correlated with letter transposition reading errors (e.g., reading slat as “salt”), but not with the Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) task. Overall, these results suggest that the dyslexic adults have a visual spatial attention deficit; however, the deficit does not reflect a reduced span in visual–spatial attention, but a deficit in processing a string of letters in parallel, probably due to difficulty in the coding of letter position.     

Allocating attention to distractor locations is based on top-down expectations

Failures of selective attention may be explained by the attentional white bear (AWB) hypothesis maintaining that prior knowledge of distractor location causes attentional allocation to it. The AWB is demonstrated by embedding infrequent trials of two simultaneous dots among flanker trials. The dot at the expected distractor location is perceived as appearing before the dot at the expected empty location, indicating attentional allocation to expected distractor locations. A major requirement of the AWB hypothesis is that it occurs in a top-down manner due to expectations. We devised a variation of the original AWB experiment, which enabled us to differentiate between the top-down and bottom-up contributions. The results show that top-down expectancies, which are a critical part of the AWB characterization, occur independently of bottom-up contributions.