Moving attention: Evidence for time-invariant shifts of visual selective attention

Abstract

Twoexperiments measured the time to shift spatial selective attention across the visual field to targets 2 or 10 deg from central fixation. A central arrow cued the most likely target location. The direction of attention was inferred from reaction times to expected, unexpected, and neutral locations. The development of a spatial attentional set with time was examined by presenting target probes at varying times after the cue. There wereno effects of distance on the time course of the attentionalset. Reaction times for far locations were slowerthan for near, but the effects of attention wereevident by 150 msec in both cases. Spatial attention does not shift with a characteristic, fixed velocity. Rather, velocity is proportional to distance, resulting in a movement time that is invariant over the distances tested.

Allocation of visual attention in younger and older adults

“…Attention might be thought of as a spotlight (e.g., Eriksen & Yeh, 1985;LaBerge, 1983;Posner, 1978;Remington & Pierce, 1984;Shulman, Remington, & McLean, 1979;Tsal, 1983). If the spotlight were narrowly focused on the central location of a five-letter string, a target at that location would require no movement of attention.…”

Movement of attentional focus across the visual field: A critical look at the evidence

“…(1979) and Remington and Pierce (1984) showed pronounced warning effects of the precue over the SOA intervals employed in Tsal's experiment. Recent experiments using precuing have found it necessary to provide a control for this effect (Eriksen & Yeh, 1985;Jonides, 1980Jonides, , 1983.…”

“…Shulman, Remington, and McLean (1979) also concluded that the change was an analog movement across the visual field, but that the "spotlight" continued to process all stimuli that were encountered in the path of the sweep to the location of the new target. Remington and Pierce (1984), on the other hand, concluded that the change in attentional focus was discrete, or, if the focus moved, that the velocity was proportional to the distance to be traveled.…”

Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Voluntary versus automatic allocation.

“…The cue appeared 200 ms before, simultaneous with, or 200 ms after the onset of the display. Subjects are known to be capable of aligning attention with a spatial location that is likely to contain task-relevant information within 200 ms of receiving that information (e.g., Eriksen & St. James, 1986;Murphy & Eriksen, 1987;Posner, 1980;Posner, Cohen, & Rafal, 1982;Remington & Pierce, 1984). Thus the leading cue placed subjects in a state of maximal attentional readiness for the appearance of the critical item, and the trailing cue did not permit subjects to align attention with the cued location before the display appears.…”