Focused attention enhances processing of some aspects of the world at the expense of unattended items. Although focused attention has been studied for decades, few studies have measured individual and group differences in how people distribute attention. In three studies, we explored differences in the breadth and distribution of attention as a function of athletic expertise. Study 1 found 25% greater attention breadth in expert athletes than in novices. Study 2 found that the distribution of focused attention for experts varied as a function of the type of athletic expertise: Experts in sports that demand greater horizontal distribution of attention (e.g., soccer) showed greater horizontal breadth of attention than did those whose sports demand more vertical attention (e.g., volleyball), and vice versa. Study 3 used a slightly modified design to replicate the results of Studies 1 and 2. Overall, the findings reveal a systematic association between the measured "shape" of focused attention in a laboratory task and expertise in a real-world skill.

According to Higgins, the regulatory focus theory states that in terms of motivational information processing, it makes a difference whether people have a promotion or prevention focus. A focus on aspirations is labeled as promotion focus, whereas a focus on responsibility is called prevention focus. In our study, the theory will be applied to the area of sport decision making. We showed that soccer players make different decisions in a sport‐specific divergent‐thinking task depending on their regulatory focus (promotion vs. prevention). Promotion‐framed athletes were able to produce more original, flexible, and adequate solutions than prevention‐framed athletes. Theoretical and practical implications for sport psychology are discussed.

The ability to devote attention simultaneously to multiple visual objects plays an important role in domains ranging from everyday activities to the workplace. Yet, no studies have systematically explored the fixation strategies that optimize attention to two spatially distinct objects. Assuming the two objects require attention nearly simultaneously, subjects either could fixate one object or they could fixate between the objects. Studies measuring the breadth of attention have focused almost exclusively on the former strategy, by having subjects simultaneously perform one attention-demanding task at fixation and another in the periphery. We compared performance when one object was at fixation and the other was in the periphery to a condition in which both objects were in the periphery and subjects fixated between them. Performance was better with two peripheral stimuli than with one central and one peripheral stimulus, meaning that a strategy of fixating between stimuli permitted greater attention breadth. Consistent with the idea that both measures tap attention breadth, sport experts consistently outperformed novices with both fixation strategies. Our findings suggest a way to improve performance when observers must pay attention to multiple objects across spatial regions. We discuss possible explanations for this performance advantage.

We tested the link between pupil size and the task effort involved in covert shifts of visual attention. The goal of this study was to establish pupil size as a marker of attentional shifting in the absence of luminance manipulations. In three experiments, participants evaluated two stimuli that were presented peripherally, appearing equidistant from and on opposite sides of eye fixation. The angle between eye fixation and the peripherally presented target stimuli varied from 12.5° to 42.5°. The evaluation of more distant stimuli led to poorer performance than did the evaluation of more proximal stimuli throughout our study, confirming that the former required more effort than the latter. In addition, in Experiment 1 we found that pupil size increased with increasing angle and that this effect could not be reduced to the operation of low-level visual processes in the task. In Experiment 2 the pupil dilated more strongly overall when participants evaluated the target stimuli, which required shifts of attention, than when they merely reported on the target's presence versus absence. Both conditions yielded larger pupils for more distant than for more proximal stimuli, however. In Experiment 3, we manipulated task difficulty more directly, by changing the contrast at which the target stimuli were presented. We replicated the results from Experiment 1 only with the high-contrast stimuli. With stimuli of low contrast, ceiling effects in pupil size were observed. Our data show that the link between task effort and pupil size can be used to track the degree to which an observer covertly shifts attention to or detects stimuli in peripheral vision.

No abstract