Load effects in attention: Comparing tasks and age groups
Attention is limited in terms of both capacity (i.e., amount of information attended) and selectivity (i.e., the degree to which non-attended information is nonetheless processed). One of the seminal theories in the field, load theory, predicts that these two aspects of attention interact in systema...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Attention, perception & psychophysics perception & psychophysics, 2020-08, Vol.82 (6), p.3072-3084 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 3084 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 3072 |
container_title | Attention, perception & psychophysics |
container_volume | 82 |
creator | Cochrane, Aaron Simmering, Vanessa Green, C. Shawn |
description | Attention is limited in terms of both capacity (i.e., amount of information attended) and selectivity (i.e., the degree to which non-attended information is nonetheless processed). One of the seminal theories in the field, load theory, predicts that these two aspects of attention interact in systematic ways. Specifically, load theory predicts that when the amount of information to attend is less than the available capacity, spare attention will naturally leak out to unattended items. While load theory has found a great deal of empirical support, the robustness of the findings has recently been called into question, in particular with respect to the extent to which the predictions are borne out across different tasks and populations. Here we report tests of perceptual load effects in two different tasks (change detection and enumeration) and in two populations (adults and 7- to 8-year-old children). Adults’ accuracies did not demonstrate the predicted interaction between the capacity and selection dimensions, whereas children’s performance, in addition to being overall worse than adults, did show the interaction. The overall lower accuracy of children was seen to be the result of a larger performance decrement in response to capacity demands, distracting information, and their interaction. Interestingly, while these results were seen at the level of the two tasks, there was no within-participants correlation across tasks. Overall, these results suggest that maturation-related changes attenuate the magnitude of distractor effects in attention, which in turn limits the evidence for interactions between capacity and selection in high-functioning populations. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3758/s13414-020-02055-6 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2401805187</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2401805187</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c485t-ada7d2f37058dd85bc55acddc6d42c6aed221f7942297c56d828bf4d7ba453f53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kD1PwzAQhi0EolD4AwzIEgtLwN922FDFl1SJBSQ2y_FHldLGwU4G_j0pKUViYDjdDc-9d3oAOMPoikqurjOmDLMCEbQpzguxB45wyWhBS_q2v5sJnoDjnJcICSokOgQTSmjJkCiPQDmPxkEfgrddhnUDTdf5pqtjcwNncd2aVDcL2Jn8nqFpHDQLDxcp9m0-AQfBrLI_3fYpeL2_e5k9FvPnh6fZ7bywTPGuMM5IRwKViCvnFK8s58Y6Z4VjxArjHSE4yJIRUkrLhVNEVYE5WRnGaeB0Ci7H3DbFj97nTq_rbP1qZRof-6wJQ1ghjpUc0Is_6DL2qRm-GyiKCWYMo4EiI2VTzDn5oNtUr0361BjpjVg9itWDVP0tVoth6Xwb3Vdr73YrPyYHgI5AbjfKfPq9_U_sFwiLghI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2431214410</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Load effects in attention: Comparing tasks and age groups</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Cochrane, Aaron ; Simmering, Vanessa ; Green, C. Shawn</creator><creatorcontrib>Cochrane, Aaron ; Simmering, Vanessa ; Green, C. Shawn</creatorcontrib><description>Attention is limited in terms of both capacity (i.e., amount of information attended) and selectivity (i.e., the degree to which non-attended information is nonetheless processed). One of the seminal theories in the field, load theory, predicts that these two aspects of attention interact in systematic ways. Specifically, load theory predicts that when the amount of information to attend is less than the available capacity, spare attention will naturally leak out to unattended items. While load theory has found a great deal of empirical support, the robustness of the findings has recently been called into question, in particular with respect to the extent to which the predictions are borne out across different tasks and populations. Here we report tests of perceptual load effects in two different tasks (change detection and enumeration) and in two populations (adults and 7- to 8-year-old children). Adults’ accuracies did not demonstrate the predicted interaction between the capacity and selection dimensions, whereas children’s performance, in addition to being overall worse than adults, did show the interaction. The overall lower accuracy of children was seen to be the result of a larger performance decrement in response to capacity demands, distracting information, and their interaction. Interestingly, while these results were seen at the level of the two tasks, there was no within-participants correlation across tasks. Overall, these results suggest that maturation-related changes attenuate the magnitude of distractor effects in attention, which in turn limits the evidence for interactions between capacity and selection in high-functioning populations.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1943-3921</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-393X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3758/s13414-020-02055-6</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32394069</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Age ; Attention ; Behavioral Science and Psychology ; Child ; Cognitive Development ; Cognitive load ; Cognitive Psychology ; Humans ; Psychology ; Reaction Time ; Visual task performance</subject><ispartof>Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2020-08, Vol.82 (6), p.3072-3084</ispartof><rights>The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2020</rights><rights>Copyright Springer Nature B.V. Aug 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c485t-ada7d2f37058dd85bc55acddc6d42c6aed221f7942297c56d828bf4d7ba453f53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c485t-ada7d2f37058dd85bc55acddc6d42c6aed221f7942297c56d828bf4d7ba453f53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758/s13414-020-02055-6$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.3758/s13414-020-02055-6$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32394069$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cochrane, Aaron</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Simmering, Vanessa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, C. Shawn</creatorcontrib><title>Load effects in attention: Comparing tasks and age groups</title><title>Attention, perception & psychophysics</title><addtitle>Atten Percept Psychophys</addtitle><addtitle>Atten Percept Psychophys</addtitle><description>Attention is limited in terms of both capacity (i.e., amount of information attended) and selectivity (i.e., the degree to which non-attended information is nonetheless processed). One of the seminal theories in the field, load theory, predicts that these two aspects of attention interact in systematic ways. Specifically, load theory predicts that when the amount of information to attend is less than the available capacity, spare attention will naturally leak out to unattended items. While load theory has found a great deal of empirical support, the robustness of the findings has recently been called into question, in particular with respect to the extent to which the predictions are borne out across different tasks and populations. Here we report tests of perceptual load effects in two different tasks (change detection and enumeration) and in two populations (adults and 7- to 8-year-old children). Adults’ accuracies did not demonstrate the predicted interaction between the capacity and selection dimensions, whereas children’s performance, in addition to being overall worse than adults, did show the interaction. The overall lower accuracy of children was seen to be the result of a larger performance decrement in response to capacity demands, distracting information, and their interaction. Interestingly, while these results were seen at the level of the two tasks, there was no within-participants correlation across tasks. Overall, these results suggest that maturation-related changes attenuate the magnitude of distractor effects in attention, which in turn limits the evidence for interactions between capacity and selection in high-functioning populations.</description><subject>Age</subject><subject>Attention</subject><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Cognitive Development</subject><subject>Cognitive load</subject><subject>Cognitive Psychology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Reaction Time</subject><subject>Visual task performance</subject><issn>1943-3921</issn><issn>1943-393X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kD1PwzAQhi0EolD4AwzIEgtLwN922FDFl1SJBSQ2y_FHldLGwU4G_j0pKUViYDjdDc-9d3oAOMPoikqurjOmDLMCEbQpzguxB45wyWhBS_q2v5sJnoDjnJcICSokOgQTSmjJkCiPQDmPxkEfgrddhnUDTdf5pqtjcwNncd2aVDcL2Jn8nqFpHDQLDxcp9m0-AQfBrLI_3fYpeL2_e5k9FvPnh6fZ7bywTPGuMM5IRwKViCvnFK8s58Y6Z4VjxArjHSE4yJIRUkrLhVNEVYE5WRnGaeB0Ci7H3DbFj97nTq_rbP1qZRof-6wJQ1ghjpUc0Is_6DL2qRm-GyiKCWYMo4EiI2VTzDn5oNtUr0361BjpjVg9itWDVP0tVoth6Xwb3Vdr73YrPyYHgI5AbjfKfPq9_U_sFwiLghI</recordid><startdate>20200801</startdate><enddate>20200801</enddate><creator>Cochrane, Aaron</creator><creator>Simmering, Vanessa</creator><creator>Green, C. Shawn</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20200801</creationdate><title>Load effects in attention: Comparing tasks and age groups</title><author>Cochrane, Aaron ; Simmering, Vanessa ; Green, C. Shawn</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c485t-ada7d2f37058dd85bc55acddc6d42c6aed221f7942297c56d828bf4d7ba453f53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Age</topic><topic>Attention</topic><topic>Behavioral Science and Psychology</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Cognitive Development</topic><topic>Cognitive load</topic><topic>Cognitive Psychology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Reaction Time</topic><topic>Visual task performance</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cochrane, Aaron</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Simmering, Vanessa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, C. Shawn</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Attention, perception & psychophysics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cochrane, Aaron</au><au>Simmering, Vanessa</au><au>Green, C. Shawn</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Load effects in attention: Comparing tasks and age groups</atitle><jtitle>Attention, perception & psychophysics</jtitle><stitle>Atten Percept Psychophys</stitle><addtitle>Atten Percept Psychophys</addtitle><date>2020-08-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>82</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>3072</spage><epage>3084</epage><pages>3072-3084</pages><issn>1943-3921</issn><eissn>1943-393X</eissn><abstract>Attention is limited in terms of both capacity (i.e., amount of information attended) and selectivity (i.e., the degree to which non-attended information is nonetheless processed). One of the seminal theories in the field, load theory, predicts that these two aspects of attention interact in systematic ways. Specifically, load theory predicts that when the amount of information to attend is less than the available capacity, spare attention will naturally leak out to unattended items. While load theory has found a great deal of empirical support, the robustness of the findings has recently been called into question, in particular with respect to the extent to which the predictions are borne out across different tasks and populations. Here we report tests of perceptual load effects in two different tasks (change detection and enumeration) and in two populations (adults and 7- to 8-year-old children). Adults’ accuracies did not demonstrate the predicted interaction between the capacity and selection dimensions, whereas children’s performance, in addition to being overall worse than adults, did show the interaction. The overall lower accuracy of children was seen to be the result of a larger performance decrement in response to capacity demands, distracting information, and their interaction. Interestingly, while these results were seen at the level of the two tasks, there was no within-participants correlation across tasks. Overall, these results suggest that maturation-related changes attenuate the magnitude of distractor effects in attention, which in turn limits the evidence for interactions between capacity and selection in high-functioning populations.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>32394069</pmid><doi>10.3758/s13414-020-02055-6</doi><tpages>13</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1943-3921 |
ispartof | Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2020-08, Vol.82 (6), p.3072-3084 |
issn | 1943-3921 1943-393X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2401805187 |
source | MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Age Attention Behavioral Science and Psychology Child Cognitive Development Cognitive load Cognitive Psychology Humans Psychology Reaction Time Visual task performance |
title | Load effects in attention: Comparing tasks and age groups |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T15%3A26%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Load%20effects%20in%20attention:%20Comparing%20tasks%20and%20age%20groups&rft.jtitle=Attention,%20perception%20&%20psychophysics&rft.au=Cochrane,%20Aaron&rft.date=2020-08-01&rft.volume=82&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=3072&rft.epage=3084&rft.pages=3072-3084&rft.issn=1943-3921&rft.eissn=1943-393X&rft_id=info:doi/10.3758/s13414-020-02055-6&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2401805187%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2431214410&rft_id=info:pmid/32394069&rfr_iscdi=true |