One of the earliest models investigating attention was developed by Broadbent (1954, 1971 cited in Edgar 2007) who considered that incoming information on different sensory "channels" was selectively filtered and that only one stream could be semantically processed at a time. This model typified the "bottleneck" approach to selective attention. His work focused on filtering and the early stages of processing. The bottleneck operates by filtering out sensory information on the basis of physical characteristics so that most incoming sensory information receives no conscious processing at all. He examined this through the split-span procedure.
Another idea that the amount of information we can attend to and process is limited is embodied in a theory proposed by Kahneman (1973 needs citing, as above). He suggests that within the brain there needs to be some sort of limited-capacity central processor. He believes that the processor is responsible for analysing incoming information and integrating it with information already held in the memory. He has examined just how much information can be processed and if this remains the same at all times. He has suggested that increased arousal would lead to more information being ‘taken in’ and processed. Kahneman redefined attention as "mental effort", limited resources being allocated according to momentary and enduring dispositions. Furthermore, Kahneman believed that some tasks required little processing as they were overlearned, automatic skills. Thus, several activities might share limited cognitive resources.)
However, Treisman, (needs citing within chapter) described the "cocktail party" effect, i.e. that it was possible for other input to intrude if relevant information was detected. Tr...
... middle of paper ...
...nse they have to give as part of the other task, then interference will occur. Stroop found that people found it harder to name what colour ink a word was written in if the word was the name of a different colour than if the word was colour neutral. Thus, an apparently automatic process, reading in this case, interfered with a controlled process, naming the colour of the ink, and made completing the task at hand harder.
The experiment found that unconscious semantic processing of words on an unattended channel was intruding upon a task of naming ink colours. This was consistent with the Stroop effect. The extent of the effect was dependent on the neutrality of the control stimulus. Future research conducted in this area should attempt to manipulate task similarity in a more definite manner and be careful to ensure that the dual tasks are presented simultaneously.
The ultimate goal for a system of visual perception is representing visual scenes. It is generally assumed that this requires an initial ‘break-down’ of complex visual stimuli into some kind of “discrete subunits” (De Valois & De Valois, 1980, p.316) which can then be passed on and further processed by the brain. The task thus arises of identifying these subunits as well as the means by which the visual system interprets and processes sensory input. An approach to visual scene analysis that prevailed for many years was that of individual cortical cells being ‘feature detectors’ with particular response-criteria. Though not self-proclaimed, Hubel and Wiesel’s theory of a hierarchical visual system employs a form of such feature detectors. I will here discuss: the origins of the feature detection theory; Hubel and Wiesel’s hierarchical theory of visual perception; criticism of the hierarchical nature of the theory; an alternative theory of receptive-field cells as spatial frequency detectors; and the possibility of reconciling these two theories with reference to parallel processing.
Hubel and Wiesel defined the classic receptive field as a restricted region of the visual cortex. If a specific stimulus fell into this area, this may drive the cell to evoke action potential responses (Zipser, Lamme & Schiller, 1996). By shining orientated slits of light into the cat’s eye, they were able to discover that each cell had its own specific stimulus requirements (Barlow, 1982). Different cells differed from each other in many ways; some preferred a spe...
By comparing the response times in the interference conditions to the control conditions he found that it took people longer to respond to the color of the ink when printed in a color incongruent to the color word (Stroop, 1995). The words interfere with naming the color; yet, the color does not interfere with reading the word.
Though the term “inattentional blindness” would not be conceived until 1998, the concept itself is not new. As cited by Simons and Chabris, Hungarian neurologist and psychiatrist Rezso Balint wrote in 1907 “It is a well-known phenomenon that we do not notice anything happening in our surroundings while being absorbed in the inspection of something…” (1999). Using the term “selective looking,” Ulric Neisser, an American psychologist, demonstrated this idea in 1979. In his study, he instructed subjects to count the number of times a group of participants threw a basketball to each other. While the subjects were focused on this attention demanding task, a woman with an umbrella walked in the middle of the participants. At th...
...We also saw that memory can play an important role too, but this is not yet clearly demonstrated. Moreover some studies reveal that the congruency (vs. incongruence) of the critical stimulus can also play an important role in awareness, a phenomenon called cocktail party effect. Such phenomenon makes clear that the relevance of the stimuli plays a key role in awareness and perception. The cocktail party effect is the phenomenon of being able to focus one's auditory attention on a particular stimulus while filtering out a range of other stimuli, much the same way that one can focus on a single conversation in a noisy room and yet be able to hear if someone calls out his name or other relevant stimuli (danger words for example). Still, sometimes we fail to perceive something that is happening right in front of us. It is easy to miss something you’re not looking for.
...ce for increased activity in visual areas or the fusiform gyrus, which is connected with color perception. These results have shown that spoken words result in co-activation of color processing areas, but not visual areas connected with the perceptual process of color. Sadly, the conclusions don’t reveal which perceptual or cognitive processes might cause the difference with people with synaesthesia and the controls.
Ratey, John J., and Albert M. Galaburda. A User's Guide to the Brain: Perception, Attention, and
...dering had an impact on performance while reading aloud and during a version of the Stroop task. During both experiments the researchers found mind wandering rates to be high and negatively associated with inaccurate responses across both conditions. In Stroop trials the researchers observed the slowest response times and highest error rates with incongruent trials (read word ‘red’ in green ink), however this was also the condition with the lowest amount of reported mind wandering. Increased mind wandering rates also forecasted slower reaction times; the findings suggest that processes associated with reading may correspond to those related to mind wandering.
There have been many experiments done on depth of processing and the self reference effect. The Depth of Processing model of memory maintains that how deep something is encoded into a person's memory depends on using certain types of processing. This relates to the self reference effect because it is believed that people have the tendency to remember something better when they can relate it to themselves. People who can personally relate to something have the tendency to embed it deeper into their memory.
The way that our brain processes information and responds to the awareness of things is a very complex system with in the brain. One study mentioned talks about the integration of senses in the brain and how we process the information. “Another study better illustrates the integrative nature of this synchrony. Words were presented in various locations on a screen; whether the subject became aware of the word’s color or if its location-indicated by being able to recall is later-depended on whether a frontal or temporal area was activated during the presentation. But if the individual registered both the color and the location, additional activity occurred in a part of the parietal cortex (Uncapher, Otten, & Rugg, 2006).” (Garrett, pg.501) This research demonstrates how different people react differently to stimuli and different levels of their cognition and awareness. It is important for people to develop a sense of awareness in order to function fully in the world. The book argues “that one apparent advantage is that it enables consistency and a playfulness in our behavior that would not be possible otherwise. (Garrett, pg. 502) It is human nature to rely on a consistency and the ability to plan ahead which is why the function of awareness is so important to the human
Khaneman (1973) devised model of attention as he believed a limited amount of attention is allocated to tasks by a central processor. Many factors determine how much attentional capacity can be allocated and how much is needed to carry out a task, as the central processor has variable but limited capacity which is dependent on motivation and arousal. The central processor engages a variety of tasks such as motor, visual, auditory, memory and so on. The central processor evaluates the amount of concentration necessary to meet task demands, which forms the basis of allocation of capacity.
This umbrella term compromises ‘various complex cognitive processes and sub-processes (Elliott, 2003). It refers to ‘the set of abilities that allows an individual to select an action that is appr...
Well, let's take a look at the brain. From being in class, my awareness about what I'm doing, what I'm seeing, what I'm hearing, what I'm thinking has come to reflect upon not just what, but how is it all being done by my brain. This morning I woke up, my eyes opened, I looked out my window, I saw the sun rising, it was this beautifully deep yellow/orange color. I thought, "How beautiful" and I smiled with a sense and feeling of wonderment. It could be said that I experienced nothing out of the ordinary this morning. Yet, if I could narrate these few activities in terms of the networking of neurons resulting in my eyes opening, my sight of the sun, my ability to perceive its color, my inner acknowledgment of its beauty and the emotions that sight evoked in me, you would be reading for a very long time and what I did this morning would indeed present itself in quite an extraordinary light. It is in recognition of this, with respect to the brain's aptitudes, that Howard Hughes in his paper, "Seeing, Hearing and Smelling the World" quoted May Pines in expressing, "We can recognize a friend instantly-full face, in profile, or even by the back of his head. We can distinguish hundreds of colors and possibly as many as 10,000 smells. We can feel a feather as it brushes our skin, hear the faint rustle of a leaf. It all seems so effortless: we open our eyes or ears and let the world stream in. Yet anything we see, hear, feel, smell, or taste requires billions of nerve cells to flash urgent messages along linked pathways and feedback loops in our brains, performing intricate calculations that scientists have only begun to decipher"(1).
This phenomenon of memory has been tested many times using the Wadsworth CogLab false memory experiment. In the Wadsworth experiment, participants are presented with a list of words each of which is shown for one and half seconds. These experiments usually entail six trial lists. After each list is shown, the participants are given a set of response buttons labeled with the words from the list. The buttons also include normal distractor words (a word that is unrelated to the list but was not shown), and special distractor words (a word that is related
Wise (2014), discusses that within the twenty first century in which the efficient completion of tasks is essential, speed reading is extremely advantageous. Not only does speed reading allow for the quicker acquisition of knowledge, it has shown to influence the brains functionality. Thus, one displays enhanced memory abilities, a higher level of attention and focus as well as a heightened problem solving ability (Wise, 2014). Despite the advantages of an increased reading speed, there is a large and significant disadvantage (Bell, 2001). The danger of developing a rapid reading rate, is that one’s level of comprehension is severely compromised. Therefore, a speed reader would not acquire an adequate amount of information when reading swiftly. It is possible that this disadvantage will have a detrimental effect on the precise completion of various academic and recreational tasks (Bell,