Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The attentional blink: why does Lag-1 sparing occur when the dependent measure is accuracy, but Lag-1 deficit when it is RT?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Psychological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Perception of the second of two targets (T1, T2) displayed in rapid sequence is impaired if it comes shortly after the first (attentional blink, AB). In an exception, known as Lag-1 sparing, T2 is virtually unimpaired if it is presented directly after T1. Three experiments examined the seemingly inconsistent findings that Lag-1 sparing occurs in accuracy but Lag-1 deficit occurs in RT. Experiment 1 pointed to masking of T2 as the critical factor. When T2 was not masked, the results replicated the conventional findings. The novel finding was that Lag-1 sparing occurred in RT, provided that T2 was masked. An account was provided by a psychological refractory period-based model in which processing was said to occur in two broadly sequential stages: stimulus selection and response planning. Experiments 2 and 3 tested predictions from the PRP-based model regarding Lag-1 sparing/Lag-1 deficit. In Experiment 2, we increased T2 salience, notionally reducing the duration of the T2 selection stage, with corresponding reduction in Lag-1 sparing. In Experiment 3, we manipulated the compatibility between the T1 stimulus and the response to notionally decrease/increase the duration of the T1 response-planning stage with corresponding increment/decrement in Lag-1 sparing. The results of both experiments confirmed predictions from the PRP-based model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We thank an anonymous reviewer for suggesting the inclusion of this summary.

References

  • Akyürek, E. G., Eshuis, S. A., Nieuwenstein, M. R., Saija, J. D., Başkent, D., & Hommel, B. (2012). Temporal target integration underlies performance at lag 1 in the attentional blink. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(6), 1448–1464.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Broadbent, D. E., & Broadbent, M. H. (1987). From detection to identification: Response to multiple targets in rapid serial visual presentation. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 42, 105–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chun, M. M., & Potter, M. C. (1995). A two-stage model for multiple target detection in rapid serial visual presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 109–127.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Craft, J. L., & Simon, J. R. (1970). Processing symbolic information from a visual display: interference from an irrelevant directional cue. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 83, 415–420.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dell’Acqua, R., Pierre, J., Pascali, A., & Pluchino, P. (2007). Short-term consolidation of individual identities leads to Lag-1 sparing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33(3), 593–609.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Di Lollo, V., Kawahara, J., Ghorashi, S. M. S., & Enns, J. T. (2005). The attentional blink: Resource depletion or temporary loss of control? Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 69, 191–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, C. W., & Eriksen, B. A. (1979). Target redundancy in visual search: Do repetitions of the target within the display impair processing? Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 26, 195–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fortier-Gauthier, U., Dell’Acqua, R., & Jolicœur, P. (2013). The “red-alert” effect in visual search: Evidence from human electrophysiology. Psychophysiology, 50, 671–679.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ghorashi, S., Enns, J. T., Spalek, T. M., & Di Lollo, V. (2009). Spatial cuing does not affect the magnitude of the attentional blink. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71, 989–993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghorashi, S. M. S., Smilek, D., & Di Lollo, V. (2007). Visual search is postponed during the attentional blink until the system is suitably reconfigured. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 124–136.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Giesbrecht, B., & Di Lollo, V. (1998). Beyond the attentional blink: Visual masking by object substitution. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1454–1466.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B., & Akyürek, E. G. (2005). Lag-1 sparing in the attentional blink: Benefits and costs of integrating two events into a single episode. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 58(8), 1415–1433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jolicœur, P. (1999). Concurrent response-selection demands modulate the attentional blink. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1097–1113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jolicœur, P., & Dell’Acqua, R. (1998). The demonstration of short-term consolidation. Cognitive Psychology, 36, 138–202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kawahara, J. I., Di Lollo, V., & Enns, J. T. (2001). Attentional requirements in visual detection and identification: Evidence from the attentional blink. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 969–984.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kawahara, J. I., Zuvic, S. M., Enns, J. T., & Di Lollo, V. (2003). Task switching mediates the attentional blink even without backward masking. Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 339–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lagroix, H., Di Lollo, V., & Spalek, T. (2016). Lag-1 sparing in accuracy and reaction time: The importance of masking. Journal of Vision, 16, 595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lagroix, H. E. P., Grubert, A., Spalek, T. M., Di Lollo, V., & Eimer, M. (2015). Visual search is postponed during the period of the AB: An event-related potential study. Psychophysiology, 52, 1031–1038.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lagroix, H. E. P., Patten, J. W., Di Lollo, V., & Spalek, T. M. (2016). Perception of temporal order during the attentional blink: Using stimulus salience to modulate prior entry. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78, 1064–1073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lappin, J. S. (1978). The relativity of choice behavior and the effect of prior knowledge on the speed and accuracy of recognition. In N. J. Castellan & F. Restle (Eds.), Cognitive theory (Vol. 3, pp. 139–168). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marti, S., King, J.-R., & Dehaene, S. (2015). Time-resolved decoding of two processing chains during dual-task interference. Neuron, 88, 1297–1307.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Marti, S., Sigman, M., & Dehaene, S. (2012). A shared cortical bottleneck underlying attentional blink and psychological refractory period. NeuroImage, 59, 2883–2898.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nieuwenhuis, S., Gilzenrat, M. S., Holmes, B. D., & Cohen, J. D. (2005). The role of the locus coeruleus in mediating the attentional blink: a neurocomputational theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 291–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olivers, C. N., & Meeter, M. (2008). A boost and bounce theory of temporal attention. Psychological Review, 115, 836.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220–244.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Potter, M. C., Chun, M. M., Banks, B. S., & Muckenhoupt, M. (1998). Two attentional deficits in serial target search: the visual attentional blink and an amodal task-switch deficit. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 979–992.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Potter, M. C., & Levy, E. I. (1969). Recognition memory for a rapid sequence of pictures. Journal of experimental psychology, 81, 10–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., & Arnell, K. M. (1992). Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: An attentional blink? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 849–860.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, A., & Sperling, G. (1986). Attention gating in short-term visual memory. Psychological Review, 93, 180–206.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Santee, J. L., & Egeth, H. E. (1982). Do reaction time and accuracy measure the same aspects of letter recognition? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 489–501.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sigman, M., & Dehaene, S. (2008). Brain mechanisms of serial and parallel processing during dual-task performance. Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 7585–7598.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E., E., & Spoehr, K. T. (1974). The perception of printed English: A theoretical perspective. In B. H. Kantowitz (Ed.), Human information processing: Tutorials in perception and cognition. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spalek, T. M., Falcon, L. J., & Di Lollo, V. (2006). Attentional blink and attentional capture: Endogenous versus exogenous control over paying attention to two important events in close succession. Perception & Psychophysics, 68, 674–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Telford, C. W. (1931). The refractory phase of voluntary and associative responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14, 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valle-Inclán, F. (1996). The locus of interference in the Simon effect: An ERP study. Biological Psychology, 43, 147–162.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Visser, T. A., Bischof, W. F., & Di Lollo, V. (1999). Attentional switching in spatial and nonspatial domains: Evidence from the attentional blink. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 458–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyble, B., Bowman, H., & Nieuwenstein, M. (2009). The attentional blink provides episodic distinctiveness: Sparing at a cost. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 787–807.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wyble, B., Potter, M. C., Bowman, H., & Nieuwenstein, M. (2011). Attentional episodes in visual perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 488–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a Canadian Foundation for Innovation New Opportunities Grant and a grant from the British Columbia Knowledge Development Fund to TMS, by Discovery Grants from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) to TMS and VDL, and by an NSERC Alexander Graham Bell Canada Graduate Scholarship and NSERC Postdoctoral Fellowship awarded to HEPL. The datasets analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, 100 St. George Street, Sidney Smith Hall, Toronto, ON, M5S 3G3, Canada

    Hayley E. P. Lagroix

  2. Department of Psychology, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Dr., Burnaby, BC, V5A 1S6, Canada

    Hayley E. P. Lagroix, Vincent Di Lollo & Thomas M. Spalek

Authors
  1. Hayley E. P. Lagroix
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vincent Di Lollo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas M. Spalek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hayley E. P. Lagroix.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lagroix, H.E.P., Di Lollo, V. & Spalek, T.M. The attentional blink: why does Lag-1 sparing occur when the dependent measure is accuracy, but Lag-1 deficit when it is RT?. Psychological Research 83, 1778–1797 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1026-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1026-3

Search

Navigation