Both exogenous and endogenous target salience manipulations support resource depletion accounts of the attentional blink: A reply to Olivers, Spalek, Kawahara & Di Lollo (2009)

Dux, Paul E., Asplund, Christopher L. and Marois, René (2009) Both exogenous and endogenous target salience manipulations support resource depletion accounts of the attentional blink: A reply to Olivers, Spalek, Kawahara & Di Lollo (2009). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16 1: 219-224. doi:10.3758/PBR.16.1.219


Author Dux, Paul E.
Asplund, Christopher L.
Marois, René
Title Both exogenous and endogenous target salience manipulations support resource depletion accounts of the attentional blink: A reply to Olivers, Spalek, Kawahara & Di Lollo (2009)
Journal name Psychonomic Bulletin & Review   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1069-9384
1531-5320
Publication date 2009-02-01
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.3758/PBR.16.1.219
Open Access Status DOI
Volume 16
Issue 1
Start page 219
End page 224
Total pages 6
Place of publication Austin, Tex., U.S.A.
Publisher Psychonomic Society
Language eng
Subject 1701 Psychology
Abstract Input control theories of the attentional blink (AB) suggest that this deficit results from impaired attentional selection caused by the post-Target 1 (T1) distractor (Di Lollo, Kawahara, Ghorashi, & Enns, 2005; Olivers, van der Stigchel, & Hulleman, 2007). Accordingly, these theories predict that there should be no AB when no distractors intervene between the targets. Contrary to these hypotheses, Dux, Asplund, and Marois (2008) observed an AB (T3 deficit) when three targets, from the same attentional set, were presented successively in a rapid stream of distractors, if subjects increased the resources they devoted to T1 processing. This result is consistent with resource depletion accounts of the AB. However, Olivers, Spalek, Kawahara, and Di Lollo (1009) argue that Dux et al.'s results can be better explained by the relationship between T1 and T2, and by target discriminability effects, rather than by the relationship between T1 and T3. Here, we find that manipulating the resources subjects devote to T1, either exogenously (target perceptual salience) or endogenously (target task relevance), affects T3 performance, even when T2 and target discriminability differences are controlled for. These results support Dux et al.'s conclusion that T1 resource depletion underlies the AB.
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Unknown

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collection: School of Psychology Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 23 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 24 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Tue, 16 Nov 2010, 19:55:05 EST by Dr Paul Dux on behalf of School of Psychology