Active Listening Delays Attentional Disengagement and Saccadic Eye Movements

Brief Report

Abstract

Successful goal-directed visual behavior depends on efficient disengagement of attention. Attention must be withdrawn from its current focus before being redeployed to a new object or internal process. Previous research has demonstrated that occupying cognitive processes with a secondary cellular phone conversation impairs attentional functioning and driving behavior. For example, attentional processing is significantly impacted by concurrent cell phone use, resulting in decreased explicit memory for on-road information. Here, we examined the impact of a critical component of cell-phone use—active listening—on the effectiveness of attentional disengagement. In the gap task—a saccadic manipulation of attentional disengagement—we measured saccade latencies while participants performed a secondary active listening task. Saccadic latencies significantly increased under an active listening load only when attention needed to be disengaged, indicating that active listening delays a disengagement operation. Simple dual-task interference did not account for the observed results. Rather, active cognitive engagement is required for measurable disengagement slowing to be observed. These results have implications for investigations of attention, gaze behavior, and distracted driving. Secondary tasks such as active listening or cell-phone conversations can have wide-ranging impacts on cognitive functioning, potentially impairing relatively elementary operations of attentional function, including disengagement.

Keywords

Visual attention Attentional disengagement Cognitive load Dual task Mental workload Distracted driving 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Cathleen Moore for use of the eye-tracking equipment and Nicole Jardine for technical support. This research was funded by a grant from the Toyota Collaborative Safety Research Center (CSRC), Detroit, Michigan, and in part by a grant from the National Science Foundation (BCS 11-51209).

References

  1. Atchley, P., & Dressel, J. (2004). Conversation limits the functional field of view. Human Factors, 46, 664–673.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Boot, W. R., & Brockmole, J. R. (2010). Irrelevant features at fixation modulate saccadic latency and direction of visual search. Visual Cognition, 18, 481–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boot, W. R., Brockmole, J. R., & Simons, D. J. (2005). Attention capture is modulated in dual-task situations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 662–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brockmole, J. R., & Boot, W. R. (2009). Should I stay or should I go? Attentional disengagement from visually unique and unexpected items at fixation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 808–815.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Cosman, J. D., Lees, M. N., Lee, J. D., Rizzo, M., & Vecera, S. P. (2011). Impaired attentional disengagement in older adults with Useful Field of View decline. Journal of Gerontology B: Psychological and Social Sciences, 67, 405–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cosman, J. D., Lees, M. N., Rizzo, M., & Vecera, S. P. (2012). Visual search for features and conjunctions following declines in the useful field of view. Experimental Aging Research, 38, 411–421.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Dorris, M. C., & Munoz, D. P. (1995). A neural correlate for the gap effect on saccadic reaction times in monkey. Journal of Neurophysiology, 73(6), 2558–2562.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Fischer, B., & Breitmeyer, B. (1987). Mechanisms of visual attention revealed by saccadic eye movements. Neuropsychologia, 25(1), 73–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Fischer, B., & Weber, H. (1993). Express saccades and human attention. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16, 553–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fukuda, K., & Vogel, E. K. (2011). Individual differences in recovery time from attentional capture. Psychological Science, 22(3), 361–368Google Scholar
  11. Han, S. H., & Kim, M. S. (2004). Visual search does not remain efficient when executive working memory is working. Psychological Science, 15, 623–628.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Hoffman, J. E., & Subramaniam, B. (1995). The role of visual attention in saccadic eye movements. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 787–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Horrey, W. J., & Wickens, C. D. (2006). Examining the impact of cell phone conversations on driving using meta-analytic techniques. Human Factors, 48, 196–205.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Just, M. A., Keller, T. A., & Cynkar, J. (2008). A decrease in brain activation associated with driving when listening to someone speak. Brain Research, 1205, 70–80.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Kingstone, A., & Klein, R. M. (1993). Visual offsets facilitate saccadic latency: Does predisengagement of visuospatial attention mediate this gap effect? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 19, 1251–1265.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Klein, R. M., Castel, A. D., & Pratt, J. (2006). The effects of memory load on the time course of inhibition of return. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(2), 294–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lavie, N., & de Fockert, J. (2005). The role of working memory in attentional capture. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 669–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lavie, N., & de Fockert, J. (2006). Frontal control of attentional capture in visual search. Visual Cognition, 14, 863–876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Matsukura, M., Brockmole, J. R., Boot, W. R., & Henderson, J. M. (2011). Oculomotor capture during real-world scene viewing depends on cognitive load. Vision Research, 51, 546–552.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Norman, D. A., & Shallice, T. (1986). Attention to action. In R. J. Davidson, G. E. Schwartz, & D. Shapiro (Eds.), Consciousness and self-regulation (pp. 1–18). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nunes, L. M., & Recarte, M. A. (2002). Cognitive demands of hands-free-phone conversation while driving. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 5, 133–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 13, 25–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Posner, M. I., Walker, J. A., Friedrich, F. J., & Rafal, R. D. (1984). Effects of parietal injury on covert orienting of attention. Journal of Neuroscience, 4, 1863–1874.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Pratt, J., Abrams, R. A., & Chasteen, A. L. (1997). Initiation and inhibition of saccadic eye movements in younger and older adults: An analysis of the gap effect. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 52B(2), 103–P107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pratt, J., Lajonchere, C. M., & Abrams, R. A. (2006). Attentional modulation of the gap effect. Vision Research, 46(16), 2602–2607.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Reuter-Lorenz, P. A., Hughes, H. C., & Fendrich, R. (1991). The reduction of saccadic latency by prior offset of the fixation point: An analysis of the gap effect. Perception & Psychophysics, 49, 167–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Reuter-Lorenz, P. A., Oonk, H. M., Barnes, L. L., & Hughes, H. C. (1995). Effects of warning signals and fixation point offsets on latencies of pro- versus antisaccades: Implications for an interpretation of the gap effect. Experimental Brain Research, 103, 287–293.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Roberts, R. J., Hager, L. D., & Heron, C. (1994). Prefrontal cognitive processes: Working memory and inhibition in the antisaccade task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123(4), 374–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rouder, J. N., Speckman, P. L., Sun, D., Morey, R. D., & Iverson, G. (2009). Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(2), 225–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Saslow, M. G. (1967). Effects of components of displacement-step stimuli upon latency of saccadic eye movements. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 57, 1027–1029.Google Scholar
  31. Strayer, D. L., & Drews, F. A. (2007). Cell-phone-induced driver distraction. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 128–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Strayer, D. L., Drews, A., & Johnston, W. A. (2003). Cell phone-induced failures of visual attention during simulated driving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9, 23–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Strayer, D. S., & Johnston, W. A. (2001). Driven to distraction: Dual-task studies of simulated driving and conversing on a cellular phone. Psychological Science, 12, 462–466.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Wright, T. J., Boot, W. R., & Brockmole, J. R. (2015). Functional fixedness: The functional significance of delayed disengagement based on attention set. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41, 17–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of NeurologyUniversity of Iowa Hospitals & ClinicsIowa CityUSA
  2. 2.Exponent IncPhoenixUSA
  3. 3.Department of Psychological and Brain SciencesUniversity of IowaIowa CityUSA

Personalised recommendations