Diluting the burden of load: Perceptual load effects are simply dilution effects.

Tsal, Yehoshua; Benoni, Hanna

doi:10.1037/a0018172

Cited by 124 publications

(288 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

259

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The lack of a Load × Congruency interaction, however, is inconsistent with perceptual-load theory, which predicts greater distractor interference under low-load than under high-load conditions (Lavie, 1995). This is not the first reported difficulty in replicating the expected perceptual-load results (see, e.g., Eltiti, Wallace, & Fox, 2005;Miller, 1991;Tsal & Benoni, 2010;Wilson, Muroi, & MacLeod, 2011). Most important for the present study is that the load manipulation produced a substantial increase in overall RTs, indicating that task difficulty was indeed increased in the high-load condition.…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 51%

“…The additional neutral letters in the high-load condition are thought to produce perceptual constraints on target processing. Tsal and Benoni (2010) argued that it is impossible to completely dissociate perceptual resource limitations from sensory or memory constraints. Hence, the manipulation in the present experiment might place an additional burden on the sensory and memory demands.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

White bear everywhere: Exploring the boundaries of the attentional white bear phenomenon

Lahav

Makovski

Tsal

2012

Atten Percept Psychophys

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some failures of selective attention may be explained by the attentional white bear (AWB) phenomenon Tsal & Makovski (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 32: [351][352][353][354][355][356][357][358][359][360][361][362][363] 2006), which indicates that prior knowledge of a distractor location causes attention to be actively allocated to it. The AWB effect is demonstrated in a task that includes infrequent trials that involve two simultaneous dots embedded among flanker trials. The dot positioned at an expected distractor location is perceived as appearing before the dot at an expected empty location, indicating that attentional resources have initially been allocated to the expected distractor locations. The main goal of this study was to explore the boundaries of the AWB phenomenon by imposing perceptual, memory, and sensory constraints on the flanker task. The results showed that the AWB effect was obtained even when additional constraints severely taxed the information-processing system. We propose that a mandatory mechanism guides a fixed minimal amount of attention to expected distractor locations in a topdown manner.

show abstract

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 51%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

White bear everywhere: Exploring the boundaries of the attentional white bear phenomenon

Lahav

Makovski

Tsal

2012

Atten Percept Psychophys

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a result, nontask visual stimuli can influence performance on the primary task in a low-load search, but will not in a high-load search situation. Recently, the load theory interpretation of these claims and the processes underlying such effects have been challenged (e.g., in dilution accounts; e.g., Tsal & Benoni, 2010;Wilson, Muroi, & MacLeod, 2011). However, the general pattern of results that load theory attempts to describe has been regularly replicated, and the theory itself is well-supported by both behavioral and neuroimaging studies involving visual stimuli (see Lavie, 2005Lavie, , 2010, for reviews).…”

Section: Crossmodal Perceptual Load Effects (Or Lack Thereof)mentioning

confidence: 91%

Now hear this: Inattentional deafness depends on task relatedness

Tellinghuisen

Cohen

Cooper

2016

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mixed results have been found for the impact of auditory information presented during high-perceptual-load visual search tasks, with some studies showing large effects and others indicating inattentional deafness, with such stimuli going largely undetected. In three experiments, we demonstrated that task relatedness is a key factor in whether extraneous auditory stimuli impact high-load visual searches. Experiment 1 addressed a methodological concern (e.g., Lavie Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 75-82, 2005) regarding the timing of the relative onsets and offsets of task-related, tobe-ignored auditory stimuli and visual search arrays in experiments that have shown auditory distractor effects. Robust auditory distractor effects were found in each timing condition, and no inattentional deafness for high-load searches. Experiments 2 and 3 demonstrated that the relationship between the auditory stimuli and visual targets determined whether attention was captured and whether the response times to identify targets were impacted. Auditory stimuli that named a response-specific category influenced responses to targets mapped exclusively to one response, but not to the same targets mapped nonexclusively. These compatibility effects were larger if the distractors named an actual target item than if they named the category to which the item belonged. This pattern suggests that to-be-ignored auditory information that closely relates to a visual target search task influences the processing of that task, particularly in a high-perceptual-load search.

show abstract

“…However, Tsal and Benoni's (2010) conclusions were criticized in a response by Lavie and Torralbo (2010). who maintained that the dilution argument is built on a misunderstanding of the load hypothesis-namely, the involuntary nature of attention spillover.…”

Section: Dilutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Twenty years of load theory—Where are we now, and where should we go next?

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selective attention allows us to ignore what is taskirrelevant and focus on what is task-relevant. The cognitive and neural mechanisms that underlie this process are key topics of investigation in cognitive psychology. One of the more prominent theories of attention is perceptual load theory, which suggests that the efficiency of selective attention is dependent on both perceptual and cognitive load. It is now more than 20 years since the proposal of load theory, and it is a good time to evaluate the evidence in support of this influential model. The present article supplements and extends previous reviews (Lavie, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 75-82. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2004.12.004, 2005, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 143-148. doi:10.1177/ 0963721410370295, 2010 by examining more recent research in what appears to be a rapidly expanding area. The article comprises five parts, examining (1) evidence for the effects of perceptual load on attention, (2) cognitive load, (3) individual differences under load, (4) alternative theories and criticisms, and (5) the future of load theory. We argue that the key next step for load theory will be the application of the model to real-world tasks. The potential benefits of applied attention research are numerous, and there is tentative evidence that applied research would provide strong support for the theory itself, as well as real-world benefits related to activities in which attention is crucial, such as driving and education.Keywords Selective attention . Perception . Perceptual load . Load theory . Distraction . Visual attention Selective attention is the ability to focus on that which is important to the task at hand while ignoring or suppressing task-irrelevant information. A key question that has fuelled much debate and research in psychology is how, and crucially when, this irrelevant information is filtered out. For example, while reading this article the reader may be surrounded by many potential distractors, such as the noise of a fly buzzing around the room. Given the top-down goal of reading this article, how much information is available to you about the fly? Can the processing of irrelevant stimuli be reduced or even prevented by internal or external factors? The inability to ignore distractors is a common experience in daily life, and though it may at times have minor consequences, such as extending the length of time it takes to read an article, in other situations lapses of attention may have far more serious consequences (e.g., in healthcare situations, or while operating heavy machinery). Perceptual load theory (Lavie, 1995(Lavie, , 2005(Lavie, , 2010Lavie & Tsal, 1994) suggests that the success or failure of selective attention is dependent on the processing demands of the current task. That is, the level of perceptual load as well as any cognitive load will determine the efficiency of distractor rejection. This theory has been hugely influential over the last 20 years,

show abstract

Diluting the burden of load: Perceptual load effects are simply dilution effects.

Cited by 124 publications

References 38 publications

White bear everywhere: Exploring the boundaries of the attentional white bear phenomenon

White bear everywhere: Exploring the boundaries of the attentional white bear phenomenon

Now hear this: Inattentional deafness depends on task relatedness

Twenty years of load theory—Where are we now, and where should we go next?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About