9am
Post on 06-Jan-2016
32 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
9am
Attention• Difficult to define - like nailing jello to the wall.• Goldstein defines it as:• the process of concentrating on specific features of:• the environment• thoughts or activities• what then is concentrating?• focusing attention
Some Examples• Dodging kids that run out into the street• Reading and listening to music• Daydreaming and not hearing someone talking to you (a.k.a. “spacing–out”)
Attention is involved in:• Perception• Memory• Language• Problem solving
Selective Attention• Loosely defined: the ability to focus on only one thing.• For example, spacing out – staring at the TV and not hearing the phone ring.Dichotic Listening Tasks (Cherry, 1953)• 2 messages presented - one in each ear• Shadowing: ‘attend to’ and repeat onemessage• Didn’t retain much from the ‘unattended’message - even when repeated 35xBroadbent’s Filter Model (1958)• human as information processor
cocktail-party phenomenon
< 1 sec10-15 sec
Broadbent’s Filter Model (1958)• early selection model: filter before meaning generated
sand
fine grain sand
size selection
messages
attended message
soundfilter
voicepitchspeedaccent
meaning
Broadbent (1958): split-scan experiment• Cond-1 = 65% accuracy• Cond-2 = 20% accuracy
CONDITION 1: repeat in any order
CONDITION 2: repeat each pair, as presented
Typical answers: MRW; HSP
Typical answers: MH; RS; WP
Assumption: -ears as separate channels-switch is costly
Flaws in the Filter Model(Gray & Wedderburn, 1960)
Moray (1959): own name heard in unattended ear is remembered
Meaning trumps filtering & switching
Explanation:No switching, because no
channelsMeaning processed before
filtering
Only attended message should get through!
“LEAKY FILTER” MODEL (ATTENUATION THEORY): Treisman (1964)
AttenuatorAnalyze incoming message in terms of:• Physical characteristics• Language• MeaningJust enough processing to distinguish different incoming messages
The Dictionary Unit• Like a memory• Contains stored words that have thresholds for being activated• Lower thresholds mean more sensitive
Treisman would say your name has a low threshold
ownnam
e
Sig
nal st
rength
Rutabuga boat
10am
LATE-SELECTION MODELS: Mackay (1973) experiment
Attend Left
“They were throwing stones at the bank.”
“river” or “money”
(biasing words)
TEST: “They threw stones toward the side of the river yesterday.”“They threw stones at the savings and loan association building yesterday.”
Which sentence is closest in meaning to the attended sentence?
BROADBENT
MACKAY
TREISMAN
Early- or late-selection models?Crucial variable for both: task load (cognitive resources)
FLANKER-COMPATIBILITY TASK (Green & Bavelier, 2003):
RT (
ms)
C I
EASY
RT (
ms)
C I
DIFFICULT
RT (
ms)
C I
RT (
ms)
C I
LOW-LOAD
HIGH-LOAD
CONTROL
RT (
ms)
C I
RT (
ms)
C I
LOW-LOAD
HIGH-LOAD
VIDEO GAME PLAYERS
Lavie (2005): EARLY-SELECTION MODELS use HIGH-LOAD tasksLATE-SELECTION MODELS use LOW-LOAD tasks
DIVIDED ATTENTION
Spelke (1976): simultaneously read and take dictation
DAY 1: can do both separately; not simultanously
After 85 hours of practice: can do both at the same time
Schneider & Shiffrin (1977):
-detecting ‘targets’ in rapidly presented frames-divide attention between memorization and visual search
becomes automatic
Schneider & Shiffrin (1977):
AUTOMATIC:a) happens without intentionb) few cognitive resources needed
Schneider & Shiffrin (1977):-automatic processing not possible for difficult tasks-both target & distractor are letters
-never becomes automatic, remains controlled processing
-everyday examples of divided attention?
DRIVING AND INATTENTION
80% of crashes caused by as little as 3 sec inattention22% of crashes due to cell phone usage
Strayer & Johnston (2001): driving simulation study
11am
VISUAL ATTENTION
Eye movements: windows into the mindsaccades (rapid movements) fixations (short pauses; 3/sec)
Eye tracker (noninvasive)
Where do we look?
Areas of high STIMULUS SALIENCE(bottom-up process)
SALIENCY MAP(Parkhurst, Law & Niebur, 2003)
SCENE SCHEMA: “office schema” top-down process
ATTENTION DURING ACTIONSTask goals guide fixations to land on
objects relevant to the task ORDER of eye movements not the same for
everybody
Inattentional blindness: looking, but not seeing (Mack & Rock,1998)
Attending without looking:
Triangle not recognized
PRECUING: attending to a location without moving the eyes (Posner, Snyder & Davidson, 1980)
Reaction time: predicted location < unexpected location
PHYSIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE FOR PRECUING(Colby, Duhamel & Goldberg, 1995)
-Light at fixation point and in the periphery-Trained to always look at the fixation point-“Fixation only” condition: release handle when fixation light dimmed-“Fixation and attention” condition: release handle when peripheral light dims
Record from neuron that fires for peripheral light
Fix Periphery
FIX PERIPHERY
AC=ABRTB<RTC
OBJECT-BASED ATTENTION
RTA < RTB < RTC
OCCLUSION
static scene,moving spotlightAttention is independent of objects
moving scene,moving spotlightAttention is connected to object
Location-based
CAN EYE MOVEMENTS DIAGNOSE ATTENTION DISORDER?
Typically developing viewersTypically developing viewers
Autistic viewersAutistic viewers
(Klin, Jones, Schultz & Volkmar, 2003)
Typically developing viewersTypically developing viewersAutistic viewersAutistic viewers
1pm
The man with a 30 second memory:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDNDRDJy-vo&feature=related
-can not form new memories1-2 minute “bubble”
Boundaries: Knowledge vs. memory?
Definition: retain, retrieve, and use information about stimuli and skills after the original information is no longer present.
Atkinson & Shiffrin (1968)
msec-sec 15-30sec years
Sensory Memory-brief retention of the effects of sensory stimulation.
The Sparkler’s Trail (persistence of vision)
How much information can be stored in sensory memory?(Sperling, 1960)
50ms presentation4–5 letters remembered
rapid decay…
TWO OPTIONS:1) too short time to take in
all information OR
1) responding takes longerthan decay time
high capacity (82%), rapid decay (~1sec)
responding takes longerthan decay time
Functions of Sensory Memory:
– Collection of information to be processed
– Holding information while processing
– Filling in blanks of intermittent stimulation (movies)
2pm
The Duration of STMPeterson & Peterson (1959):
Read 3 letters, followed by a numberCount back by 3sRecall 3 letters after 3sec or 18sec
DECAY PROACTIVE INTERFERENCE (PI)
– Trial 1: B F T 100 …97 …94 … – Trial 2: Q S D 96 …– Trial 3: K H J 104 …
The Capacity of STM (how much information can be stored?)
Digit span: 5-8 ITEMS 5-8 CHUNKSWhat’s an item: letter? word? phrase?
Chase & Simon (1973): show chess setup for 5 sec
Master knows how to “chunk”, without necessarily having a superior STM
(auditory)
The CODING OF INFORMATION in STM(the way information is represented)
AUDITORY CODING (Conrad, 1964):
– saw letters briefly (e.g., FHSGZ…)- asked to write down letters in the order they were presented- when errors occur, they are based on similar sound (F seen as S or X), rather than visual similarity (F seen as E).
Sound > Vision
The CODING OF INFORMATION in STM
VISUAL CODING (Zhang & Simon, 1985):
The CODING OF INFORMATION in STM
SEMANTIC CODING (Wickens, 1976):
3pm
Complexity: STM as many distinct mechanisms.Demonstration: Reading text and remembering numbers.
STM: passive simple storage
Manipulate info during complex cognition
Baddeley (2000): Working Memory
How to manipulate incoming info?
Baddeley (2000):
Working Memory is a limited capacity system for temporary storage and manipulation of information for complex tasks (e.g., comprehension, learning, reasoning).
Verbal, auditory… Visual, spatial…
SPECIALIZATION in WM
INTEGRATION in WM
The Phonological LoopThree phenomena suggest a specialized sub-system:1. Phonological Similarity Effect– ‘mac, can, cap, map’ harder than ‘pen, pay, cow, rig’– Conrad (1964): Misidentifications phonologically similar
US > Welsh children digit span
2. Word-length effect
3. Articulatory suppression (dual tasking) can diminish the word-length effect
Word-length effect occurs only if rehearsal allowed:memorization is a learning process
Articulatory Suppression & PhonologicalSimilarity Effect
Conrad (1964): control condition
INTERACTIONS BETWEEN PHONOLOGICAL LOOP AND SKETCH PAD
VERBAL stimulus, VERBAL response
VERBAL stimulus, SPATIAL response
Say Yes/No
Visual stimulus, verbal response
Visual stimulus, visual response
Point to Yes/No
4pm
Effects support idea of two specialized subcomponents:Phonological Loop and Visuospatial sketch pad
Working Memory can handle different information
But…
overloads when similar type of info presented simultaneously
CENTRAL EXECUTIVE: controls suppression of irrelevant information
Gazzaley et al. (2005)
Articulatory suppression has minor effect: decrease memory span from 7 to 5
no prefrontal cortex = forgetful hungry monkey
XWhere in brain is short-term storageand processing?
“out of sight, out of mind”
<8 month old:occluded object gone out of existence
Reason: prefrontal cortex not developed
…similar to lack of OBJECT PERMANENCE in infants
Funahashi et al. (1989)
American Sign Langauge should be visual visuo-spatial sketch pad
But it shows features of phonological loop processing:
Word-length effect: words with longer gestures harder to remember
Phonological similarity effect: words expressed by similar gestures harder to remember
CONCLUSION: Phonological loop activated by language irrespective of modality (sound or gesture)
top related