Slide
Centre Interdisciplinaire
de Recherche et d’Innovation
en Cybersécurité et Société
de Recherche et d’Innovation
en Cybersécurité et Société
1.
Duncan, J.; Roberge, A.; Fortier-Gauthier, U.; Fiset, D.; Blais, C.; Brisson, B.
Dual task interference on early perceptual processing Article de journal
Dans: Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, vol. 83, no 4, p. 1777–1795, 2021, ISSN: 19433921 (ISSN), (Publisher: Springer).
Résumé | Liens | BibTeX | Étiquettes: attention, Attentional Blink, Central attention, Dual task, human, Humans, masking, motivation, Perceptual Masking, Psychological, psychological refractory period, Refractory Period, Task switching, Visual working memory, Visual-spatial attention
@article{duncan_dual_2021,
title = {Dual task interference on early perceptual processing},
author = {J. Duncan and A. Roberge and U. Fortier-Gauthier and D. Fiset and C. Blais and B. Brisson},
url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85092941211&doi=10.3758%2fs13414-020-02158-0&partnerID=40&md5=ed05e8e0cd7ffa5e63ee38027b3e5d44},
doi = {10.3758/s13414-020-02158-0},
issn = {19433921 (ISSN)},
year = {2021},
date = {2021-01-01},
journal = {Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics},
volume = {83},
number = {4},
pages = {1777–1795},
abstract = {When two tasks, Task 1 and Task 2, are conducted in close temporal proximity and a separate speeded response is required for each target (T1 and T2), T2 report performance decreases as a function of its temporal proximity to T1. This so-called psychological refractory period (PRP) effect on T2 processing is largely assumed to reflect interference from T1 response selection on T2 response selection. However, interference on early perceptual processing of T2 has been observed in a modified paradigm, which required changes in visual-spatial attention, sensory modality, task modality, and response modality across targets. The goal of the present study was to investigate the possibility of early perceptual interference by systematically and iteratively removing each of these possible non perceptual confounds, in a series of four experiments. To assess T2 visual memory consolidation success, T2 was presented for a varying duration and immediately masked. T2 report accuracy, which was taken as a measure of perceptual—encoding or consolidation—success, decreased across all experimental control conditions as T1–T2 onset proximity increased. We argue that our results, in light of previous studies, show that central processing of a first target, responsible for the classical PRP effect, also interferes with early perceptual processing of a second target. We end with a discussion of broader implications for psychological refractory period and attentional blink effects. © 2020, The Author(s).},
note = {Publisher: Springer},
keywords = {attention, Attentional Blink, Central attention, Dual task, human, Humans, masking, motivation, Perceptual Masking, Psychological, psychological refractory period, Refractory Period, Task switching, Visual working memory, Visual-spatial attention},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
When two tasks, Task 1 and Task 2, are conducted in close temporal proximity and a separate speeded response is required for each target (T1 and T2), T2 report performance decreases as a function of its temporal proximity to T1. This so-called psychological refractory period (PRP) effect on T2 processing is largely assumed to reflect interference from T1 response selection on T2 response selection. However, interference on early perceptual processing of T2 has been observed in a modified paradigm, which required changes in visual-spatial attention, sensory modality, task modality, and response modality across targets. The goal of the present study was to investigate the possibility of early perceptual interference by systematically and iteratively removing each of these possible non perceptual confounds, in a series of four experiments. To assess T2 visual memory consolidation success, T2 was presented for a varying duration and immediately masked. T2 report accuracy, which was taken as a measure of perceptual—encoding or consolidation—success, decreased across all experimental control conditions as T1–T2 onset proximity increased. We argue that our results, in light of previous studies, show that central processing of a first target, responsible for the classical PRP effect, also interferes with early perceptual processing of a second target. We end with a discussion of broader implications for psychological refractory period and attentional blink effects. © 2020, The Author(s).
2.
Warren, C. M.; Breuer, A. T.; Kantner, J.; Fiset, D.; Blais, C.; Masson, M. E. J.
Target-distractor interference in the attentional blink implicates the locus coeruleus-norepinephrine system Article de journal
Dans: Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, vol. 16, no 6, p. 1106–1111, 2009, ISSN: 10699384.
Résumé | Liens | BibTeX | Étiquettes: article, Attentional Blink, human, Humans, Learning, locus ceruleus, Locus Coeruleus, Memory, Models, noradrenalin, Norepinephrine, Pattern Recognition, perception, Perceptual Masking, physiology, Psychological, psychological model, Psychophysics, reaction time, Serial Learning, short term memory, Short-Term, Visual
@article{warren_target-distractor_2009,
title = {Target-distractor interference in the attentional blink implicates the locus coeruleus-norepinephrine system},
author = {C. M. Warren and A. T. Breuer and J. Kantner and D. Fiset and C. Blais and M. E. J. Masson},
url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-74849134787&doi=10.3758%2fPBR.16.6.1106&partnerID=40&md5=dedfbcb0f338038cbcaedefcbc9d184f},
doi = {10.3758/PBR.16.6.1106},
issn = {10699384},
year = {2009},
date = {2009-01-01},
journal = {Psychonomic Bulletin and Review},
volume = {16},
number = {6},
pages = {1106–1111},
abstract = {We provide evidence that the locus coeruleus-norephinephrine (LC-NE) system is the neurophysiological basis of the attentional blink. The attentional blink refers to decreased accuracy for reporting the second of two targets in a rapid serial visual presentation of distractors. The LC-NE account of the attentional blink posits that targets elicit a facilitative LC-NE system response that is available for the first target but subsequently unavailable to the second, due to the autoinhibitory nature of the LC-NE system. We propose a modification of the LC-NE account, suggesting that the LC-NE system response is elicited by interference between mutually exclusive responses demanded by temporally proximal targets and distractors. We increased the interference between the first target and the following distractor by reducing the time between them. For identifying the second target this high-interference condition yielded a benefit up to 200 msec after onset of the first, followed by a decrease in accuracy. Consistent with our modification of the LC-NE account, this result suggests a temporarily enhanced LC-NE system response to increased target-distractor interference. © 2009 The Psychonomic Society, Inc.},
keywords = {article, Attentional Blink, human, Humans, Learning, locus ceruleus, Locus Coeruleus, Memory, Models, noradrenalin, Norepinephrine, Pattern Recognition, perception, Perceptual Masking, physiology, Psychological, psychological model, Psychophysics, reaction time, Serial Learning, short term memory, Short-Term, Visual},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
We provide evidence that the locus coeruleus-norephinephrine (LC-NE) system is the neurophysiological basis of the attentional blink. The attentional blink refers to decreased accuracy for reporting the second of two targets in a rapid serial visual presentation of distractors. The LC-NE account of the attentional blink posits that targets elicit a facilitative LC-NE system response that is available for the first target but subsequently unavailable to the second, due to the autoinhibitory nature of the LC-NE system. We propose a modification of the LC-NE account, suggesting that the LC-NE system response is elicited by interference between mutually exclusive responses demanded by temporally proximal targets and distractors. We increased the interference between the first target and the following distractor by reducing the time between them. For identifying the second target this high-interference condition yielded a benefit up to 200 msec after onset of the first, followed by a decrease in accuracy. Consistent with our modification of the LC-NE account, this result suggests a temporarily enhanced LC-NE system response to increased target-distractor interference. © 2009 The Psychonomic Society, Inc.