Limits...
Evidence for attentional processing in spatial localization.

Adam JJ, Davelaar EJ, van der Gouw A, Willems P - Psychol Res (2007)

Bottom Line: Using a dual-task methodology, this study examined the involvement of selective attention in spatial localization.Results revealed a robust interference effect in localization performance at short target durations that depended on the number of the to-be-identified distractor items.This outcome provides convergent support for the role of the attentional system in spatial localization.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Movement Sciences, University of Maastricht, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. jos.adam@bw.unimaas.nl

ABSTRACT
Using a dual-task methodology, this study examined the involvement of selective attention in spatial localization. Thirty participants located a single, briefly presented, peripheral target stimulus, appearing in one of 50 positions on either side of a central fixation point, with or without the requirement to identify a simultaneously presented central distractor stimulus. Results revealed a robust interference effect in localization performance at short target durations that depended on the number of the to-be-identified distractor items. This outcome provides convergent support for the role of the attentional system in spatial localization.

Show MeSH
a Mean difference in localization error between the single- and dual-task conditions as a function of the number of distractor items in the distractor stimulus (i.e., the 1-, 2-, and 3-distractor groups) averaged over target-mask onset delay; b the optimal time shift (τ) necessary to produce the best fit between the localization performance functions of the single-task and dual-task conditions as a function of the number of distractor items in the distractor stimulus
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2367386&req=5

Fig4: a Mean difference in localization error between the single- and dual-task conditions as a function of the number of distractor items in the distractor stimulus (i.e., the 1-, 2-, and 3-distractor groups) averaged over target-mask onset delay; b the optimal time shift (τ) necessary to produce the best fit between the localization performance functions of the single-task and dual-task conditions as a function of the number of distractor items in the distractor stimulus

Mentions: Figure 4a depicts the mean overall interference effect (i.e., subtracting localization error in the single-task condition from that in the dual-task condition) for the 1-, 2-, and 3-distractor groups. Figure 4b depicts the time shift τ for the 1-, 2-, and 3-element distractor groups. Clearly, increasing the number of to-be-identified distractor items in the distractor stimulus caused increasingly larger and longer lasting localization interference effects. In fact, a linear regression analysis on the individual time-shift data revealed that the attentional system takes about 66 ms to identify each distractor item (F(1, 22) = 26.03, p < 0.001) without a general shift associated with dual-tasking (non-significant intercept = 2.5 ms).Fig. 4


Evidence for attentional processing in spatial localization.

Adam JJ, Davelaar EJ, van der Gouw A, Willems P - Psychol Res (2007)

a Mean difference in localization error between the single- and dual-task conditions as a function of the number of distractor items in the distractor stimulus (i.e., the 1-, 2-, and 3-distractor groups) averaged over target-mask onset delay; b the optimal time shift (τ) necessary to produce the best fit between the localization performance functions of the single-task and dual-task conditions as a function of the number of distractor items in the distractor stimulus
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2367386&req=5

Fig4: a Mean difference in localization error between the single- and dual-task conditions as a function of the number of distractor items in the distractor stimulus (i.e., the 1-, 2-, and 3-distractor groups) averaged over target-mask onset delay; b the optimal time shift (τ) necessary to produce the best fit between the localization performance functions of the single-task and dual-task conditions as a function of the number of distractor items in the distractor stimulus
Mentions: Figure 4a depicts the mean overall interference effect (i.e., subtracting localization error in the single-task condition from that in the dual-task condition) for the 1-, 2-, and 3-distractor groups. Figure 4b depicts the time shift τ for the 1-, 2-, and 3-element distractor groups. Clearly, increasing the number of to-be-identified distractor items in the distractor stimulus caused increasingly larger and longer lasting localization interference effects. In fact, a linear regression analysis on the individual time-shift data revealed that the attentional system takes about 66 ms to identify each distractor item (F(1, 22) = 26.03, p < 0.001) without a general shift associated with dual-tasking (non-significant intercept = 2.5 ms).Fig. 4

Bottom Line: Using a dual-task methodology, this study examined the involvement of selective attention in spatial localization.Results revealed a robust interference effect in localization performance at short target durations that depended on the number of the to-be-identified distractor items.This outcome provides convergent support for the role of the attentional system in spatial localization.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Movement Sciences, University of Maastricht, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. jos.adam@bw.unimaas.nl

ABSTRACT
Using a dual-task methodology, this study examined the involvement of selective attention in spatial localization. Thirty participants located a single, briefly presented, peripheral target stimulus, appearing in one of 50 positions on either side of a central fixation point, with or without the requirement to identify a simultaneously presented central distractor stimulus. Results revealed a robust interference effect in localization performance at short target durations that depended on the number of the to-be-identified distractor items. This outcome provides convergent support for the role of the attentional system in spatial localization.

Show MeSH