The "beam of darkness": Spreading of the attentional blink within and between objects

Conci, Markus; Müller, Hermann J.

doi:10.3758/app.71.8.1725

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The finding of a same-object benefit for identical T1 and T2 stimuli in Experiment 2 is also consistent with Raymond (2003; see also Conci & Müller, 2009). Our results mirror these previous findings and further show that repeated perceptual objects (Experiment 2), rather than repeated response-defining features (Experiment 1), lead to a reduction of the AB.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

“…The results from Experiment 1 failed to show spared lag-1 performance; rather, the AB was particularly pronounced at lag 1. This may have resulted from the task switch between two targets (from a local-object direction discrimination task to a global-shape “counting” task) and from the relatively long T1-T2 lag (120 ms; see also Conci & Müller, 2009).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Kanizsa-figure object completion gates selection in the attentional blink

Chen

Nie

Müller

et al. 2019

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous work has demonstrated that perceptual grouping modulates the selectivity of attention across space. By contrast, how grouping influences the allocation of attention over time is much less clear. This study investigated this issue, using an attentional blink (AB) paradigm to test how grouping influences the initial selection and the subsequent short-term memory consolidation of a target. On a given trial, two red Kanizsa-type targets (T1 and T2) with varying grouping strength were embedded in a rapid serial visual presentation stream of irrelevant distractors. Our results showed the typical AB finding: impaired identification of T2 when presented close in time following T1. Moreover, the AB was modulated by the T2 grouping—independently of the T1 structure—with stronger grouping leading to a decreased AB and overall higher performance. Conversely, a reversed pattern, namely an increased AB with increasing grouping strength was observed when the Kanizsa figure was not task-relevant. Together, these findings suggest that the grouping benefit emerges at early perceptual stages, automatically drawing attentional resources, thereby leading to either sustained benefits or transient costs—depending on the task-relevance of the grouped object. This indicates that grouping modulates processing of objects in time.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Kanizsa-figure object completion gates selection in the attentional blink

Chen

Nie

Müller

et al. 2019

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…is frequently reported for horizontal objects, whereas a same object cost (i.e., slower RTs to invalid locations on a cued object versus a non-cued object) has been reported for vertical objects (Al-Janabi & Greenberg, 2016;Conci & Müller, 2009;Harrison & Feldman, 2009;Hein, Blaschke, & Rolke, 2016;Pilz, Roggeveen, Creighton, Bennet, & Sekular, 2012). Our work previously investigated this dissociation by comparing the reallocation of object-based attention across the horizontal versus vertical meridian using an 'L'-shaped object (Barnas & Greenberg, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Object-based attention shifts are driven by target location, not object placement

Barnas

Greenberg

2019

Visual Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Object-based attention (OBA) enhances processing within an attended object. We previously found that attention shifts that crossed the visual field meridians were faster horizontally than vertically, which we named a Shift Direction Anisotropy (SDA). We aimed to determine whether the SDA depends upon attention shift meridian crossings of object boundaries, target locations, or both. Participants viewed an 'L'-shaped object and responded to a target at the cued vertex location (valid) or at non-cued object locations offset horizontally (invalid-horizontal) or vertically (invalid-vertical). In Experiment 1, object boundaries and target locations were positioned either crossing or not crossing the meridians. In Experiments 2A and 2B, object boundaries were held constant (always crossing or never crossing the meridians, respectively) while target locations were manipulated (randomly crossing or non-crossing). In Experiments 3A and 3B, target locations were held constant while object boundaries were manipulated. In Experiment 4, the object was removed to determine whether object-based or space-based attentional resources were being deployed. The SDA emerged only when target locations necessitated shifts that crossed the meridians, regardless of object placement, demonstrating that the SDA is driven by target location relative to the meridians and that OBA processes prioritize specific target locations within an object.

show abstract

“…Previous studies have suggested that object orientation can affect the sign of object-based selection effects (Conci & Müller, 2009;de-Wit, Kentridge, & Milner, 2009;Harrison & Feldman, 2009;Pilz et al, 2012). Pilz et al, for example, asked participants to identify a target in the double-rectangle cueing paradigm (Exp.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%