Different attentional mechanisms subserve the attentional blink and visual search
Joseph et al. (1997) found that a search task that was performed efficiently as a single task was impaired under dual-task conditions. This led to the claim that visual search is not performed preattentively. But that claim is questionable because different criteria (efficiency of visual search a...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Others |
Language: | English |
Published: |
2009
|
Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/2429/15690 |
id |
ndltd-UBC-oai-circle.library.ubc.ca-2429-15690 |
---|---|
record_format |
oai_dc |
spelling |
ndltd-UBC-oai-circle.library.ubc.ca-2429-156902018-01-05T17:37:50Z Different attentional mechanisms subserve the attentional blink and visual search Ghorashi, S.M. Shahab Joseph et al. (1997) found that a search task that was performed efficiently as a single task was impaired under dual-task conditions. This led to the claim that visual search is not performed preattentively. But that claim is questionable because different criteria (efficiency of visual search and mean level of performance) were used to assess attentional requirements under single- and dual-task conditions. In four experiments, I found that the two measures are affected in different ways by attentional manipulations and, therefore, represent different attentional processes. This finding questions the validity of the evidence used by Joseph et al. to substantiate the claim that all forms of visual search require attention. Arts, Faculty of Psychology, Department of Graduate 2009-11-24T21:42:46Z 2009-11-24T21:42:46Z 2004 2004-11 Text Thesis/Dissertation http://hdl.handle.net/2429/15690 eng For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use. 1248079 bytes application/pdf |
collection |
NDLTD |
language |
English |
format |
Others
|
sources |
NDLTD |
description |
Joseph et al. (1997) found that a search task that was performed efficiently as a single
task was impaired under dual-task conditions. This led to the claim that visual search is
not performed preattentively. But that claim is questionable because different criteria
(efficiency of visual search and mean level of performance) were used to assess
attentional requirements under single- and dual-task conditions. In four experiments, I
found that the two measures are affected in different ways by attentional manipulations
and, therefore, represent different attentional processes. This finding questions the
validity of the evidence used by Joseph et al. to substantiate the claim that all forms of
visual search require attention. === Arts, Faculty of === Psychology, Department of === Graduate |
author |
Ghorashi, S.M. Shahab |
spellingShingle |
Ghorashi, S.M. Shahab Different attentional mechanisms subserve the attentional blink and visual search |
author_facet |
Ghorashi, S.M. Shahab |
author_sort |
Ghorashi, S.M. Shahab |
title |
Different attentional mechanisms subserve the attentional blink and visual search |
title_short |
Different attentional mechanisms subserve the attentional blink and visual search |
title_full |
Different attentional mechanisms subserve the attentional blink and visual search |
title_fullStr |
Different attentional mechanisms subserve the attentional blink and visual search |
title_full_unstemmed |
Different attentional mechanisms subserve the attentional blink and visual search |
title_sort |
different attentional mechanisms subserve the attentional blink and visual search |
publishDate |
2009 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/2429/15690 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT ghorashismshahab differentattentionalmechanismssubservetheattentionalblinkandvisualsearch |
_version_ |
1718589989336383488 |