Literature DB >> 22409143

Effects of a coactor's focus of attention on task performance.

Anne Böckler1, Günther Knoblich, Natalie Sebanz.   

Abstract

Coactors take into account certain aspects of each other's tasks even when this is not required to perform their own task. The present experiments investigated whether the way a coactor allocates attention affects one's own attentional relation to stimuli that are attended jointly (Experiment 1), individually (Experiment 2), or in parallel (Experiments 3 and 4). Pairs of participants sitting next to each other performed a two-choice Navon task, responding to the identity of letters. Participants' tasks either required the same focus of attention (e.g., both attending to local stimulus features) or different foci of attention (e.g., one attending to local and the other to global features). Results revealed a significant slow-down of responses when participants focused on different features, suggesting that the coactor's attentional focus induced a conflict that affected the selection of one's own focus. This effect disappeared when no other person was present, and when mutual visual access to each other's stimuli was disrupted, but did not depend on a triangular relationship between participants and stimuli. Our findings extend previous research on joint attention and task corepresentation in revealing that representations of a coactor's task can include a specification of her focus of attention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22409143     DOI: 10.1037/a0027523

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  18 in total

1.  Action or attention in social inhibition of return?

Authors:  Silviya P Doneva; Mark A Atkinson; Paul A Skarratt; Geoff G Cole
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2015-12-26

2.  Influence of time-of-day on joint Navon effect.

Authors:  Marco Fabbri; Matteo Frisoni; Monica Martoni; Lorenzo Tonetti; Vincenzo Natale
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2017-11-28

3.  Synchrony effect on joint attention.

Authors:  Marco Fabbri; Matteo Frisoni; Monica Martoni; Lorenzo Tonetti; Vincenzo Natale
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-05-16       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Joint-Attention and the Social Phenotype of School-Aged Children with ASD.

Authors:  Peter Mundy; Stephanie Novotny; Lindsey Swain-Lerro; Nancy McIntyre; Matt Zajic; Tasha Oswald
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2017-05

5.  Contextual cueing in co-active visual search: Joint action allows acquisition of task-irrelevant context.

Authors:  Xuelian Zang; Artyom Zinchenko; Jiao Wu; Xiuna Zhu; Fang Fang; Zhuanghua Shi
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-04-18       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  No evidence of task co-representation in a joint Stroop task.

Authors:  Daniel R Saunders; David Melcher; Wieske van Zoest
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-08-29

7.  Joint perception: gaze and social context.

Authors:  Daniel C Richardson; Chris N H Street; Joanne Y M Tan; Natasha Z Kirkham; Merrit A Hoover; Arezou Ghane Cavanaugh
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 3.169

8.  Joint attention, shared goals, and social bonding.

Authors:  Wouter Wolf; Jacques Launay; Robin I M Dunbar
Journal:  Br J Psychol       Date:  2015-08-10

9.  Joint response-effect compatibility.

Authors:  Roland Pfister; Thomas Dolk; Wolfgang Prinz; Wilfried Kunde
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2014-06

10.  What's in a Friendship? Partner Visibility Supports Cognitive Collaboration between Friends.

Authors:  Allison A Brennan; James T Enns
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.