Measuring and modeling attentional dwell time

Abstract

Attentional dwell time (AD) defines our inability to perceive spatially separate events when they occur in rapid succession. In the standard AD paradigm, subjects should identify two target stimuli presented briefly at different peripheral locations with a varied stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA). The AD effect is seen as a long-lasting impediment in reporting the second target, culminating at SOAs of 200-500 ms. Here, we present the first quantitative computational model of the effect-a theory of temporal visual attention. The model is based on the neural theory of visual attention (Bundesen, Habekost, & Kyllingsbaek, Psychological Review, 112, 291-328 2005) and introduces the novel assumption that a stimulus retained in visual shortterm memory takes up visual processing-resources used to encode stimuli into memory. Resources are thus locked and cannot process subsequent stimuli until the stimulus in memory has been recoded, which explains the long-lasting AD effect. The model is used to explain results from two experiments providing detailed individual data from both a standard AD paradigm and an extension with varied exposure duration of the target stimuli. Finally, we discuss new predictions by the model.

Effects of monitoring for visual events on distinct components of attention

“…A previous study suggests that sustaining an attentional set to perform a visual monitoring task and maintaining information in VSTM can interfere in some circumstances (Helton and Russell, 2013). This is compatible with the idea that activation-based maintenance in VSTM relies on neuronal resources necessary for encoding new visual information (Petersen et al, 2012; Schneider, 2013). The present results do not indicate such interference.…”

Temporal expectancy in the context of a theory of visual attention

“…The general framework of TVA, which will be presented below, has been highly successful in accounting for a wide range of findings within the attention literature (for an overview, see [2,3]). Until recently, however, few TVA-based studies had investigated attentional effects within the temporal domain [4][5][6][7]. Here, we substantially extend one of these previous studies [4] and present the first parametric investigation of the relationship between temporal expectations and the way in which we process information.…”

“…The VSTM system is conceived as a feedback mechanism that sustains activity in the neurons that have won the attentional competition, making the information represented by these neurons available for other cognitive processes. Recently, it has been suggested that this feedback mechanism may underlie the attentional dwell time phenomenon [5] (i.e. the inability to correctly identify the second of two targets presented in close temporal proximity).…”

Out with the old? The role of selective attention in retaining targets in partial report

“…In this procedure, two masked target objects are presented, one after the other, and the time delay between the target presentations is manipulated. Subjects often find it difficult to perceive the second target when the delay between it and the previous target is short (generally between 200 and 500 ms; Duncan, Ward, & Shapiro, 1994; but see Petersen, Kyllingsbaek, & Bundesen, 2012;Theeuwes, Godijn, & Pratt, 2004). Selective attention is locked onto the first target for a period of time after that target is presented; targets presented before selective attention is released are less likely to be processed (Petersen et al, 2012).…”