Prior entry explains order reversals in the attentional blink
Prior entry explains order reversals in the attentional blink
复制标题
DOI：
10.3758/s13414-010-0004-7
复制
发表时间：
2011-01-01
影响因子：
1.7
通讯作者：
Scharlau, Ingrid
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Olivers, Christian N. L.;Hilkenmeier, Frederic;Scharlau, Ingrid
当两个目标快速连续出现时，第一个目标(T1)通常被识别，但第二个目标(T2)经常被遗漏。当T2紧跟在第一个T1之后、滞后1的时候，这种“注意力眨眼”的一个显著例外就会发生。然后，它通常会被排除在外，但报告的顺序是错误的--也就是在T1之前。这些顺序颠倒导致了一种假设，即由于两个目标合并成一个单独的插曲表征，所以发生了“滞后1保留”。在这里，我们报告了与另一种理论一致的证据：T2比T1受到更多的关注，导致先前进入工作记忆。两个实验表明，T2的性能超过T1的性能越多，进行的顺序反转就越多。此外，预先提示T1会导致性能优势从T2转移到T1，并且顺序颠倒也会相应减少。我们的结论是，没有必要假设情节积分来解释滞后1保留或伴随的顺序颠倒。
When two targets are presented in rapid succession, the first target (T1) is usually identified, but the second target (T2) is often missed. A remarkable exception to this "attentional blink" occurs when T2 immediately follows the first T1, at lag 1. It is then often spared but reported in the wrong order-that is, before T1. These order reversals have led to the hypothesis that "lag 1 sparing" occurs because the two targets merge into a single episodic representation. Here, we report evidence consistent with an alternative theory: T2 receives more attention than T1, leading to prior entry into working memory. Two experiments showed that the more T2 performance exceeded that for T1, the more order reversals were made. Furthermore, precuing T1 led to a shift in performance benefits from T2 to T1 and to an equivalent reduction in order reversals. We conclude that it is not necessary to assume episodic integration to explain lag 1 sparing or the accompanying order reversals.