8/23/2023 0 Comments Dichotic listening theoryWe conclude that selective attention does not occur during perceptual processing of speech sounds presented to the two ears. In both experiments, simultaneous and sequential performance were essentially identical, despite the need for attention sharing between the two ears during the simultaneous condition. This distractor was always presented to any ear not containing a target. ![]() Experiment II utilized a distracting consonant not confusable with any of the four target consonants. Experiment I used no distracting stimuli. One of the four consonants was presented to an attended ear during one of these intervals. The sequential condition involved two intervals in the first S listened to the right ear in the second S listened to the left ear. The simultaneous condition involved one of four randomly chosen stop-consonants being presented to one of the ears chosen at random. Can processing be differentially allocated to the two ears? Two conditions were used. The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: How frequent are attention shifts to one’s name in an irrelevant auditory channel? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 255–260.This study tests the locus of attention during selective listening for speech-like stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 30, 1302–1321. Working memory capacity and the antisaccade task: Individual differences in voluntary saccade control. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 11, 56–60. Attention in dichotic listening: Affective cues and the influence of instructions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 189–217. The generality of working memory capacity: A latent variable approach to verbal and visuospatial memory span and reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 47–70. ![]() Working memory capacity and the control of attention: The contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 637–671. The role of prefrontal cortex in working-memory capacity, executive attention, and general fluid intelligence: An individual differences perspective. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 169–183. A controlled-attention view of working memory capacity: Individual differences in memory span and the control of visual orienting. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. Executive attention, working memory capacity, and a two-factor theory of cognitive control. Engle (Eds.), Handbook of understanding and measuring intelligence (pp. Understanding intelligence: A summary and an adjustable-attention hypothesis. ![]() Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 769–786.Ĭowan, N. Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 331–335.Ĭonway, A. The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: The importance of working memory capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 884–889.Ĭonway, A. ![]() Individual differences in working memory capacity predict visual attention allocation. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. These results suggest that as WMC capacity increases, so does the ability to control the focus of attention, with high WMC participants being able to flexibly “zoom in” or “zoom out” depending on task demands.īaddeley, A., & Hitch, G. Here we find that 66.7% of high WMC and 34.5% of low WMC participants detected their name. In the present study, individual differences in divided attention were examined in a dichotic listening task, in which participants shadowed one message and listened for their own name in the other message. found that when the participant’s name was presented to the ignored ear, 65% of participants with low WMC reported hearing their name, compared to only 20% of participants with high WMC, suggesting greater selective attention on the part of high WMC participants. This relationship has been observed in a number of selective attention paradigms including a dichotic listening task (Conway, Cowan, & Bunting, 2001) in which participants were required to shadow words presented to one ear and ignore words presented to the other ear. The controlled attention theory of working memory suggests that individuals with greater working memory capacity (WMC) are better able to control or focus their attention than individuals with lesser WMC.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |