Learn More
Accuracy for a second target (T2) is reduced when it is presented within 500 ms of a first target (T1) in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP)-an attentional blink (AB). Reducing the amount of attentional investment with an additional task or instructing the use of a more relaxed cognitive approach has been found to reduce the magnitude of the AB. As(More)
Accuracy for a second target is reduced when it is presented within 500 msec of a first target. This phenomenon is called the attentional blink (AB). A diffused attentional state (via positive affect or an additional task) has been shown to reduce the AB, whereas a focused attentional state (via negative affect) has been shown to increase the AB,(More)
The attentional blink (AB) is a transient attention cost that is shown when report accuracy for a second target (T2) is reduced when T2 is presented within approximately 500 ms of a first target (T1). Thus, by definition an AB is only observed when T2 accuracy is reduced at short relative to long T1-T2 separations, and the magnitude of the AB is reflected(More)
When two masked, to-be-attended targets are presented within approximately half a second of each other, performance on the second target (T2) suffers, relative to when the targets are presented further apart in time or when the first target (T1) can be ignored. This phenomenon is known as the attentional blink (AB). Colzato et al. (Psychon Bull Rev(More)
Accuracy for a second target (T2) is reduced when it is presented within 500 ms of a first target (T1) in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) - an attentional blink (AB). There are reliable individual differences in the magnitude of the AB. Recent evidence has shown that the attentional approach that an individual typically adopts during a task or in(More)
Attention can be guided involuntarily by physical salience and by non-salient, previously learned reward associations that are currently task-irrelevant. Attention can be guided voluntarily by current goals and expectations. The current study examined, in two experiments, whether irrelevant reward associations could disrupt current, goal-driven, voluntary(More)
Selective attention is often framed as being primarily driven by two factors: task-relevance and physical salience. However, factors like selection and reward history, which are neither currently task-relevant nor physically salient, can reliably and persistently influence visual selective attention. The current study investigated the nature of the(More)
Task-relevant and physically salient features influence visual selective attention. In the present study, we investigated the influence of task-irrelevant and physically nonsalient reward-associated features on visual selective attention. Two hypotheses were tested: One predicts that the effects of target-defining task-relevant and task-irrelevant features(More)
Non-salient task-irrelevant features previously associated with reward can involuntarily capture attention (Anderson et al., 2011). Here we investigated the interaction between this reward-associated involuntary capture effect and voluntary attentional control. In a training task, participants (n=17) learned to associate two target colors (red and blue)(More)
Features previously associated with reward capture attention, even when task-irrelevant and physically non-salient. We investigated the effect of such reward-associated features on the precision of working memory representations. We hypothesized that reward-associated features would enhance the precision of WM representations for items presented with that(More)