Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Attentional distribution in visual space

  • Published:
Psychological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The horizontal extent of the visual attentive field was measured by the use of a two-choice-RT task and compatible and incompatible distractors. The target was a line that inclined either to the left or to the right. Whether or not the subject performed the choice RT was made contingent upon whether two other stimuli presented in the visual display matched or mismatched. The match-mismatch stimuli varied in locations so as to manipulate the relevant visual area (the attended area). The locations of the distractors were also varied. The increase in RT associated with incompatible distractors was found to vary inversely with their distance from the edge of the area attended to and independently of their distance from the target lines. The results were interpreted in terms of an inhibitory field that surrounds the area attended to.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allport, D. A., Tipper, S. P., & Chmiel, N. (1985). Perceptual integration and post-categorical filtering. In M. Posner & O. S. M. Marin (Eds.),Attention and performance XI, pp. 107–132. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broadbent, D. (1982). Task combination and the selective intake of information.Acta Psychologica, 50, 253–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coles, M. G. H., Gratton, G., Bashore, T. R., Eriksen, C. W., & Donchin, E. (1985). A psychophysiological investigation of the continuous flow model of human information processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 529–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalrymple-Alford, E. C., & Budayr, B. (1966). Examination of some aspects of the Stroop colour-word test.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 23, 1211–1214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver, J., & Baylis, G. C. (1989). Movement and visual attention: The spotlight metaphor breaks down.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 448–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, J. (1980). The locus of interference in the perception of simultaneous stimuli.Psychological Review, 87, 272–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, J. (1984). Selective attention and the organization of visual information.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 501–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task.Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 143–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, B. A., Eriksen, C. W., & Hoffman, J. E. (1986). Recognition memory and attentional selection: Serial scanning is not enough.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 12, 476–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, C. W., Coles, M. G. H., Morris, L. R., & O'Hara, W. P. (1985). An electromyographic examination of response competition.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 23, 165–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, C. W., & Hoffman, J. E. (1973). The extent of processing of noise elements during selective encoding from visual displays.Perception & Psychophysics, 14, 155–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, C. W., & Hoffman, J. E. (1974). Selective attention: Noise suppression or signal enhancement?Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 4, 587–589.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, C. W., O'Hara, W. P., & Eriksen, B. A. (1982). Response competition effects in same-different judgments.Perception & Psychophysics, 32, 261–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, C. W., & Rohrbaugh, J. (1970). Visual masking in multielement displays.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 83, 147–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, C. W., & Schultz, D. W. (1977). Retinal locus and acuity in visual information processing.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 9, 81–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, C. W., & Yeh, Y.-Y. (1985). Allocation of attention in the visual field.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 11, 583–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flowers, J. H. (1990). Priming effects in perceptual classification.Perception & Psychophysics, 47, 135–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, G. R., Boroughs, J. M., & Canham, L. (1984). Temporal dynamics of associative interference and facilitation produced by visual context.Perception & Psychophysics, 36, 499–507.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, J. M., & Macquistan, A. D. (in press). The spatial distribution of attention following an exogenous cue.Perception & Psychophysics.

  • Hoffman, J. E., & Nelson, B. (1981). Spatial selectivity in visual search.Perception & Psychophysics, 30, 283–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, J. E., Nelson, B., & Houck, M. R. (1983). The role of attentional resources in automatic detection.Cognitive Psychology, 15, 379–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, H. C., & Zimba, L. D. (1985). Spatial maps of directed visual attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception andPerformance, 11, 409–430.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, H. C., & Zimba, L. C. (1987). Natural boundaries for the spatial spread of directed visual attention.Neuropsychologia, 25, 5–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, W. (1890/1950).The principles of psychology (Vol. 1), authorized edition. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Henik, A. (1977). Effects of visual grouping on immediate recall and selective attention. In S. Dornic (Ed.),Attention and performance VII, pp. 307–332. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Henik, A. (1981). Perceptual organization and attention. In M. Kubovy & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.),Perceptual organization (pp. 181–211). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Treisman, A. (1984). Changing views of attention and automaticity. In R. Parasuraman & R. Davies (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 29–62). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keren, G., O'Hara, W. P., & Skelton, J. M. (1977). Levels of noise processing and attentional control.Journal ofExperimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 653–664.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, A. F., & Jacobson, A. (1991). Perceptual organization and focused attention: The role of objects and proximity in visual processing.Perception & Psychophysics, 50, 267–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, A. F., Tham, M. P., & Yeh, Y.-Y. (1991). Movement and focused attention: A failure to replicate.Perception & Psychophysics, 50, 537–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • LaBerge, D. (1983). Spatial extent of attention to letters in words.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 371–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • LaBerge, D., & Brown, V. (1989). Theory of operations in shape identification.Psychological Review, 96, 101–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • LaBerge, D., Brown, V., Carter, M., Bash, D., & Hartley, A. (1991). Reducing the effects of adjacent distractors by narrowing attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 65–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowe, D. G. (1979). Strategies, context, and the mechanism of response inhibition.Memory & Cognition, 7, 382–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowe, D. G. (1985). Further investigations of inhibitory mechanisms in attention.Memory & Cognition, 13, 74–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Navon, D. (1984). Resources — a theoretical soupstone?Psychological Review, 91, 216–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Navon, D. (1990). Does attention serve to integrate features?Psychological Review, 97, 453–459.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neill, W. T. (1977). Inhibitory and facilitatory processes in selective attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 444–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neill, W. T., & Westberry, R. L. (1987). Selective attention and the suppression of cognitive noise.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 13, 327–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, G. L., Remington, R. W., & McLean, J. P. (1979). Moving attention through visual space.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 522–526.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tipper, S. P., MacQueen, G. M., & Brehaut, J. C. (1988). Negative priming between response modalities: Evidence for the central locus of inhibition in selective attention.Perception & Psychophysics, 43, 45–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsal, Y., & Lavie, N. (1988). Attending to color and shape: The special role of location in selective visual processing.Perception & Psychophysics, 44, 15–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Heijden, A. H. C. (1992). Selective attention in vision. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yantis, S., & Johnston, J. C. (1990). On the locus of visual selection: Evidence from focused attention tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 135–149.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, 603 E. Daniel, 61820, Champaign, IL, USA

    Charles W. Eriksen & Kaiyu Pan

  2. Universidad Amonoma de Madrid, Spain

    Juan Botella

Authors
  1. Charles W. Eriksen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kaiyu Pan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Juan Botella
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eriksen, C.W., Pan, K. & Botella, J. Attentional distribution in visual space. Psychol. Res 56, 5–13 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00572128

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00572128

Keywords

Search

Navigation