Attentional Blink and Attention - Research Paper Example

Attentional Blink Attentional Blink and Attention Attentional blink is a behaviour during Rapid Series Visual Presentation (RSVP). It impacts the attention when a sequence of visual stimuli (targets) are shown to the subject in rapid succession with such a speed that the subject usually fails to detect the next target in the succession. The detection of target is usually followed by a time span of 500 milliseconds, during this period the subsequent targets are missed (Gazzaniga & Bizzi, 2000). The term blink is associated with this phenomenon because it is as if the first target triggers an eye blink. Influence through variation in time on observing second target The probability of observing the second target is usually due to the two state visual processing system. An initial parallel stage is required to process every target so only a few ones get selected for in-depth processing. Experiments have been performed where the subjects were exposed to rapid sequences of letters at a fixed point and then asked to respond on each trial. The first trial to indicate the first target and the second trial to indicate either a presence or the absence of the second target. When the subjects reported the first target for T-1 was almost always presents so much so that some trials ignored the presence of the first target. However the absence and presence of the second target was very interesting as it showed significant pendency on the time difference between the appearances of the two targets. sCircumstances that can eliminate attentional blink It is almost impossible to totally eliminate attentional blink. It can be managed and reduced with techniques such as meditation and increasing the attention span of the subject. However the most effective way as demonstrated in an experiment by Livesey et al. (2009) shows that when the first target indicates about the location of the next target letter then attentional blink can be significantly reduced. In other words if the subject is able to predict correctly about the next target letter then there is a possibility that some of the times attentional blink will be absent (Livesey et al. 2009). The same experiment also showed that participants showed a faster reaction time when exposed to predictive targets. CogLab demonstration; Other targets that could might induce attentional blink. Any target or letter which is not the first target can be used to induce the attentional blink. The experiment showed that regardless of the time lapse the first target did not induce the attentional blink; it was unaffected by the separation. Focusing on the first target impacts the detection of the second target but the reverse is not true. Consequential effect The effect of each target is based on the time difference between the previous target. For instance, if the subjects are asked to ignore the first target then there is a good chance that they will spot the second target with an increased accuracy. This has been established in a study that showed increased accuracy for spotting the second target at all time-lags indicating that the mere presence of the first target does not disrupt the performance of the second target (Gazzaniga & Bizzi, 2000). Allocating attention to the first target results in this phenomenon during which the second target cannot be located hence triggering and attentional blink. Reasoning It has been discussed in the paper that by any chance the first target indicates or gives an indication to the subject for predicting the next target reduces the attentional blink. Also, if the first target is ignored completely and all attention is focused on the second target then detection is significantly enhanced. The reason for both these predictions is based on the same premise that when the brain is occupied by processing the information about the first target it is hard to divert the focus immediately on the second target to locate or report. Another variation of the same technique is established through the process of subitizing; if small numbers of targets (letters etc.) can be perceptually grouped and subitized then shifting attentional resources needed for locating the second target will most probably not impair the duration within this subitized range (Leonard, 2009). Experiments have confirmed that this theory is applicable with enumeration of about 3 to 4 objects performed in parallel. Three occupations in which workers’ performance is adversely affected by attentional blink. Race car drivers, air traffic controllers, stock market analysts, foreign exchange dealers etc. are some of the professions that are highly prone to be affected by attentional blink. At very high speeds race car drivers are exposed to attentional blink very often. Handling a powerful machine at such a high speed is a very complex task. At such a high speed the driver can miss any target because of the sheer speed of the card that gives very limited interval for the driver to process information. Similarly the stock market analysts, foreign exchange dealers and the traffic controllers are exposed to so much information that they need to process at very high speed. They can simply be the victim of attentional blink and commit a fatal error. A slight change in the currency rate, or the speed of an Airbus or the variation in the share price can all be the potential triggers for attentional blink in such professions. Vehicles with heads-up display (HUD) and Attentional Blink The design of an automobile with heads-up display has speed, distance etc. displayed in the peripheral vision or in front of the driver was a very good idea. The driver would not need to shift gaze and look down at the panel on the dashboard. When all those dials are displayed on the hood of the car the driver does not really have to concentrate by taking off his or her eyes from the road and onto the dashboard and then back on the road. By simply looking at the road the driver can get some indication about the speed, fuel or any other indication about the cars performance. This design significantly prevents attentional divide. The car driver does not have to interrupt his/her concentration by taking her eyes off the road hence the attention does not get divided. The question of attentional blink is ambiguous to answer in the context of such a design. It depends on the context of the targets which in this case could be other automobiles or the pillars passing by inside a tunnel when the car is moving at 100 miles an hour. Such a design probably would not prevent the attentional blink because the driver can fail to spot a target because of the ‘blink’ regardless of where the speedometers are located. References Gazzaniga, M. S. & Bizzi, E. (2000) The new cognitive neuroscience. MIT Press. Leonard, C. J. 2009. Capacity limits and the attentional blink. MI: ProQuest. Livesey, E. J., Harris, I. M., and Harris, J. A. (2009) Attentional changes during implicit learning: Signal validity protects a target stimulus from the attentional blink. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 35(2). pp. 408-422. Read More