PSY 211 1st Edition Lecture 12Outline of Current Lecture I. Capacity TheoriesII. Control vs. AutomaticityIII. Spatial AttentionIV. Object-based AttentionCurrent LectureCapacity TheoriesMeasuring Capacity via Divided AttentionThe capacity requirements of the two tasks can be measured as the impairments (e.g, slow-down) in one task when it is performed simultaneous with other task, versus alone.Attention as Specific Resources - Some task combinations are more difficult to others- This suggests differences in the kind of resources required by the various task. (Specific Capacity)- Specific capacity appears to arise because of the cognitive operations involved (e.g., verbal vs. spatial) in a task, or the perceptual/motor systems required.Attention as a General Resource- Regardless of the nature of the task, increasing the difficulty of one eventually impairs the others.- This suggests that the two tasks share some attentional resources (General Capacity).- Research suggests strong links between General Capacity, Working Memory, Executive Controls, and Fluid Intelligence, all dependent on the frontal lobes.Kahneman’s Capacity Model (1973)These notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.1. Can we measure capacity?- Yes, with the secondary task technique.2. Is capacity general or task specific?- Both, general linked to frontal decision processes; specifically linked to specific perceptual/ motor systems.3. Do some tasks use no resources?- Yes, pretty close to none: automaticityControl vs. AutomaticityAutomatic ProcessingThree main criteria are used to define a process as automatic:1. Occurs without intention- They can be triggered even when we don’t want them to be.2. Occurs without awareness- We often don’t know they’re operating or remember their effects.3. Occurs without interfering with other processes- They take little or no capacity and thus can operate in parallel with other processes.Two additional feature of automatic processes: they are fast and inflexible (S-R based).Highly practiced actions and cognitive practices can become automatic however, there is different types of practice.- Consistent Mapping: the “mapping” to stimuli to response is the same over time/ events. o E.g., X= "yes", O= "no" ... leads to Automatic processing.- Variable Mapping: the “mapping” of stimuli to responses (S to R) changes over time/events.o E.g., Trials 1-100: X= "yes", O= "no";o Trials 101-200: X= "no", O= "yes" ... would require Controlledprocessing (at least for a while).Controlled Processes3 main criteria are used to define a process as controlled1. Occurs with intention- Do not occur unless we “will” them to.2. Occurs with awareness- We know they’re operating and remember their effects.3. Causes interferences with other processes- They require substantial capacity and thus operate serially, one step (action/operation) at a timeTwo additional features of controlled processes: they are slow and flexible.Controlled and Automatic Processes- Rarely occur in isolation.- Most thought and behaviorreflect a mix of controlled (intended/aware) and automatic (unintended/unaware) processing.- When these two processesact in concert, performanceis facilitated; when they actin opposition, performanceis slow and error prone.- Some of the most well-known & informative effects in cognitive psychology are based on the opposition of control and automaticity.The Stroop TaskThe Stroop effect occurs because, in the incongruent condition, an automatic process (word reading) acts in opposition to (and thus interferes with) a controlled but less practiced process (color naming).The Simon TaskThe Simon Effect responses are faster and more accurate when a stimulus occurs in the same relative location as a response, even if stimulus location is irrelevant to the task.Spatial AttentionHow is attention deployed in space?The Spotlight of AttentionWhat are the characteristics of this spotlight?- Covert Attention: the ability to direct and more visual attention independent of gaze direction- Spatial Attention: as “perceptual glue” binding together the feature of an object (Treisman’s FIT).The Binding Problem: Spatial Attention- Neuroscience research shows thatmany features of an object (e.g.,shape, color, texture, spatiallocation, etc.) are processed in noncontiguousbrain areas that do notfeed into a central integration area.- But if this is the case, then why do we perceive all ofthe features of an object as tightly "bound" togetherin a particular spatial location?- Also, if there is some mechanism that solves thebinding problem, can this mechanism fail, therebycausing the features of objects to become unbound?Treisman’s Feature Integration Theory- Created to explainresults from searchtasks; and to solve the"binding" problem.- Feature Modules: Low-levelbasic-feature processors; cf. the “what” system.- Map of locations: Spatiallayout of environment; cf. thewhere system.- Attention spotlight: Solves thebinding problem; & creates...- Object file: temporary rep. ofan object's current status;retrieves info from LTM.Evidence for Feature-based PR: Pop-out Effects in Visual SearchCognitive research shows that if a search target is defined in terms of a single primitive feature, it "pops out" allowing many items to be searched at once (known as "parallel search").In contrast, if a search target is defined by a conjunction of primitive features, then each item mustbe searched one at a time (known as "serial [or conjunction] search").Testing FIT: Illusory Conjunctions- If the Attention Spotlight is required to bind the features of an object, then the features of objects that are not in the spotlight should be "unbound" leading to “illusory conjunctions”.- Illusory conjunctions found after (a) damage toparietal lobe; and (b) in normal subjects underconditions of divided attention.- If Object Files truly exist, then priming effects should be object-specific.Object-based AttentionRather than being deployed to spatial locations (in the form of a spotlight), can attention also be directedat (and thus "illuminate") specific objects?Three sources of evidence for object-based attention:- Cueing Task: Targets detected faster if part of a cued (attended) object then a non-cued (unattended) object.- Whole-object Selection Effects: Neural evidence thatunattended features of an