The Time Course of Competition for Attention: Attention Is Initially Labile

Mary C. Potter, Adrian Staub, Daniel H O'Connor

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Competition for attention between 2 written words was investigated by presenting the words briefly in a single stream of distractors (Experiment 1) or in different streams (Experiment 2-6), using rapid serial visual presentation at 53 ms/item. Stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) was varied from 0 to 213 ms. At all SOAs there was strong competition, but which word was more likely to be reported shifted markedly with SOA. At SOAs in the range of 13-53 ms the second word was more likely to be reported, but at 213 ms. the advantage switched to the first word, as in the attentional blink. A 2-stage competition model of attention is proposed in which attention to a detected target is labile in Stage 1. Stage 1 ends when one target is identified, initiating a serial Stage 2 process of consolidation of that target.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1149-1162
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
Volume28
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2002
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Attentional Blink
Time Course
Stimulus
Onset
Experiment
Consolidation
Distractor

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Behavioral Neuroscience

Cite this

The Time Course of Competition for Attention : Attention Is Initially Labile. / Potter, Mary C.; Staub, Adrian; O'Connor, Daniel H.

In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, Vol. 28, No. 5, 01.01.2002, p. 1149-1162.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{28e2c6b83c914a6cbb6419a3517a11c7,
title = "The Time Course of Competition for Attention: Attention Is Initially Labile",
abstract = "Competition for attention between 2 written words was investigated by presenting the words briefly in a single stream of distractors (Experiment 1) or in different streams (Experiment 2-6), using rapid serial visual presentation at 53 ms/item. Stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) was varied from 0 to 213 ms. At all SOAs there was strong competition, but which word was more likely to be reported shifted markedly with SOA. At SOAs in the range of 13-53 ms the second word was more likely to be reported, but at 213 ms. the advantage switched to the first word, as in the attentional blink. A 2-stage competition model of attention is proposed in which attention to a detected target is labile in Stage 1. Stage 1 ends when one target is identified, initiating a serial Stage 2 process of consolidation of that target.",
author = "Potter, {Mary C.} and Adrian Staub and O'Connor, {Daniel H}",
year = "2002",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/0096-1523.28.5.1149",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "1149--1162",
journal = "Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance",
issn = "0096-1523",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Time Course of Competition for Attention

T2 - Attention Is Initially Labile

AU - Potter, Mary C.

AU - Staub, Adrian

AU - O'Connor, Daniel H

PY - 2002/1/1

Y1 - 2002/1/1

N2 - Competition for attention between 2 written words was investigated by presenting the words briefly in a single stream of distractors (Experiment 1) or in different streams (Experiment 2-6), using rapid serial visual presentation at 53 ms/item. Stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) was varied from 0 to 213 ms. At all SOAs there was strong competition, but which word was more likely to be reported shifted markedly with SOA. At SOAs in the range of 13-53 ms the second word was more likely to be reported, but at 213 ms. the advantage switched to the first word, as in the attentional blink. A 2-stage competition model of attention is proposed in which attention to a detected target is labile in Stage 1. Stage 1 ends when one target is identified, initiating a serial Stage 2 process of consolidation of that target.

AB - Competition for attention between 2 written words was investigated by presenting the words briefly in a single stream of distractors (Experiment 1) or in different streams (Experiment 2-6), using rapid serial visual presentation at 53 ms/item. Stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) was varied from 0 to 213 ms. At all SOAs there was strong competition, but which word was more likely to be reported shifted markedly with SOA. At SOAs in the range of 13-53 ms the second word was more likely to be reported, but at 213 ms. the advantage switched to the first word, as in the attentional blink. A 2-stage competition model of attention is proposed in which attention to a detected target is labile in Stage 1. Stage 1 ends when one target is identified, initiating a serial Stage 2 process of consolidation of that target.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85047670461&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85047670461&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/0096-1523.28.5.1149

DO - 10.1037/0096-1523.28.5.1149

M3 - Article

C2 - 12421061

AN - SCOPUS:85047670461

VL - 28

SP - 1149

EP - 1162

JO - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

JF - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

SN - 0096-1523

IS - 5

ER -