Abstract
A main prediction from the zoom lens model for visual attention is that performance is an inverse function of the size of the attended area. The “attention shift paradigm” developed by Sperling and Reeves (1980) was adapted here to study predictions from the zoom lens model. In two experiments two lists of items were simultaneously presented using the rapid serial visual presentation technique. Subjects were to report the first item he/she was able to identify in the series that did not include the target (the letter T) after he/she saw the target. In one condition, subjects knew in which list the target would appear; in another condition, they did not have this knowledge, having to attend to both positions in order to detect the target. The zoom lens model predicts an interaction between this variable and the distance separating the two positions where the lists are presented. In both experiments, this interaction was observed. The results are also discussed as a solution to the apparently contradictory results with regard to the analog movement model.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barriopedro, M. I. (1994, May).Mapping the allocation of spatial attention with an RSVP task. Poster presented at the conference Converging Operations in the Study of Visual Selective Attention, Beckman Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Botella, J., &Eriksen, C. W. (1992). Filtering versus parallel processing in RSVP tasks.Perception & Psychophysics,51, 334–343.
Botella, J., Garcia, M. L., &Barriopedro, M. [I.] (1992). Intrusion patterns in rapid serial visual presentation tasks with two response dimensions.Perception & Psychophysics,52, 547–552.
Downing, C. J. (1988). Expectancy and visual spatial attention: Effects on perceptual quality.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,14, 188–202.
Downing, C. J., &Pinker, S. (1985). The spatial structure of visual attention. In M. I. Posner & O. S. M. Marin (Eds.),Attention and performance XI (pp. 171–187). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Egly, R., &Homa, D. (1991). Reallocation of visual attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 142–159.
Eriksen, C. W. (1990). Attentional search of the visual field. In D. Brogan (Ed.),Visual search (pp. 3–19). New York: Taylor & Francis.
Eriksen, C. W., &Hoffman, J. E. (1972). Temporal and spatial characteristics of selective encoding from visual displays.Perception & Psychophysics,12, 201–204.
Eriksen, C. W., &Murphy, T. D. (1987). Movement of attentional focus across the visual field: A critical look at the evidence.Perception & Psychophysics,42, 299–305.
Eriksen, C. W., Pan, K., &Botella, J. (1993). Attentional distribution in visual space.Psychological Research,56, 5–13.
Eriksen, C. W., &Rohrbaugh, J. W. (1970). Some factors determining efficiency of selective attention.American Journal of Psychology,83, 330–342.
Eriksen, C. W., &Spencer, T. (1969). Rate of information processing in visual perception: Some results and methodological considerations.Journal of Experimental Psychology Monographs,79(2, Pt. 2), 1–16.
Eriksen, C. W., &St. James, J. D. (1986). Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model.Perception & Psychophysics,40, 225–240.
Eriksen, C. W., &Webb, J. M. (1989). Shifting of attentional focus within and about a visual display.Perception & Psychophysics,45, 175–183.
Eriksen, C. W., &Yeh, Y. Y. (1985). Allocation of attention in the visual field.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,5, 583–597.
Gathercole, S. E., &Broadbent, D. E. (1984). Combining attributes in specified and categorized target search: Further evidence for strategy differences.Memory & Cognition,12, 329–337.
Hughes, H. C., &Zimba, L. D. (1985). Spatial maps of directed visual attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,11, 409–430.
Hughes, H. C., &Zimba, L. D. (1987). Natural boundaries for the spa tial spread of directed visual attention.Neuropsychologia,25, 5–18.
Jonides, J. (1980). Toward a model of the mind’s eye.Canadian Journal of Psychology,34, 103–112.
Jonides, J. (1983). Further toward a model of the mind’s eye’s movement.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,21, 247–250.
Kanwisher, N. G. (1987). Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token individuation.Cognition,27, 117–143.
Klein, R., &McCormick, P. (1989). Covert visual orienting: Hemifieldactivation can be mimicked by zoom lens and midlocation placement strategies.Acta Psychologica,70, 235–250.
Kramer, A. F., &Hahn, S. (1995). Distribution of attention over noncontiguous regions of the visual field.Psychological Science,6, 381–386.
Kwak, H.-W., Dagenbach, D., &Egeth, H. (1991). Further evidence for a time-independent shift of the focus of attention.Perception & Psychophysics,49, 473–480.
Laberge, D. (1983). Spatial extent of attention to letters in words.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,9, 371–379.
Laberge, D., &Brown, V. (1986). Variations in size of the visual field in which targets are presented: An attentional range effect.Perception & Psychophysics,40, 188–200.
Lawrence, D. H. (1971). Two studies of visual search for word targets with controlled rates of presentation.Perception & Psychophysics,10, 85–89.
McCormick, P. A., &Klein, R. (1990). The spatial distribution of attention during covert visual orienting.Acta Psychologica,75, 225–242.
Mclean, J. P., Broadbent, D. E., &Broadbent, M. H. P. (1983). Combining attributes in rapid sequential visual presentation tasks.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,22, 279–287.
Murphy, T. D., &Eriksen, C. W. (1987). Temporal changes in the distribution of attention in the visual field in response to precues.Perception & Psychophysics,42, 576–586.
Pan, K., &Eriksen, C. W. (1993). Attentional distribution in the visual field during same-different judgments as assessed by response competition.Perception & Psychophysics,53, 134–144.
Posner, M. I. (1978).Chronometrie exploration of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,32, 3–25.
Posner, M. I., Nissen, M. J., &Ogden, W. C. (1978). Attended and unattended processing modes: the role of set for spatial location. In H. L. Pick & I. J. Saltzman (Eds.),Modes ofperceiving and processing information (pp. 137–157). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Posner, M. I., Snyder, C. R. R., &Davidson, B. J. (1980). Attention and the detection of signals.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,109, 160–174.
Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., &Arnell, K. M. (1992). Temporary suppression of visual processing in a RSVP task: An attentional blink?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 849–860.
Reeves, A., &Sperling, G. (1986). Attention gating in short-term visual memory.Psychological Review,93, 180–206.
Sagi, D., &Julesz, B. (1985). Fast, noninertial shifts of attention.Spatial Vision,1, 141–149.
Shapiro, K. L., Raymond, J. E., &Arnell, K. M. (1994). Attention to visual pattern information produces the attentional blink in rapid serial visual presentation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 357–371.
Shaw, M. L. (1978). Temporal changes in the distribution of attention in the visual field in response to precues.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,4, 586–598.
Shaw, M. L., &Shaw, P. (1977). Optimal allocation of cognitive resources to spatial locations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,3, 201–211.
Shulman, G. L., Remington, R. W., &McLean, J. P. (1979). Moving attention through visual space.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,5, 522–526.
Shulman, G. L., Sheehy, J. B., &Wilson, J. (1986). Gradients of spatial attention.Acta Psychologica,61, 167–181.
Shulman, G. L., Wilson, J., &Sheehy, J. B. (1985). Spatial determinants of the distribution of attention.Perception & Psychophysics,37, 59–65.
Sperling, G., &Reeves, A. (1980). Measuring the reaction time of an unobservable response: a shift of visual attention. In R. Nickerson (Ed.),Attention and performance VIII (pp. 347–360). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sperling, G., &Weichselgartner, E. (1995). Episodic theory of the dynamics of spatial attention.Psychological Review,102, 503–532.
Stoffer, T. H. (1993). The time course of attentional zooming: A comparison of voluntary and involuntary allocation of attention to the levels of compound stimuli.Psychological Research,56, 14–25.
Theeuwes, J. (1995). Perceptual selectivity for color and form: On the nature of the interference effect. In A. F. Kramer, M. G. H. Coles, & G. D. Logan (Eds.),Converging operations in the study of visual selective attention (pp. 297–314). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Tsal, Y. (1983). Movements of attention across the visual field.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,9, 523–530.
van der Heijden, A. H. C. (1992).Selective attention in vision. London: Routledge.
Weichselgartner, E., Sperling, G., &Reeves, A. (1985). Effects of concurrent tasks, distance, and visual obstacles on shifts of visual attention.Proceedings of the Eastern Psychological Association,56, 72.
Yantis, S. (1988). On analog movements of visual attention.Perception & Psychophysics,43, 203–206.
Yantis, S. (1995). Attentional Capture in Vision. In A. F. Kramer, M. G. H. Coles, & G. D. Logan (Eds.),Converging operations in the study of visual selective attention (pp. 45–76). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Yantis, S., &Johnston, D. N. (1990). Mechanisms of attentional priority.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 812–825.
Yantis, S., &Jones, E. (1991). Mechanisms of attentional selection: Temporally modulated priority tags.Perception & Psychophysics,50, 166–178.
Yantis, S., &Jonides, J. (1984). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Evidence from visual search.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 601–621.
Yantis, S., &Jonides, J. (1990). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Voluntary versus automatic allocation.Journal of Experi-mental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 121–134.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Barriopedro, M.I., Botella, J. New evidence for the zoom lens model using the RSVP technique. Perception & Psychophysics 60, 1406–1414 (1998). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208001
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208001