Literature DB >> 23302215

Splitting attention reduces temporal resolution from 7 Hz for tracking one object to <3 Hz when tracking three.

Alex O Holcombe1, Wei-Ying Chen.   

Abstract

Overall performance when tracking moving targets is known to be poorer for larger numbers of targets, but the specific effect on tracking's temporal resolution has never been investigated. We document a broad range of display parameters for which visual tracking is limited by temporal frequency (the interval between when a target is at each location and a distracter moves in and replaces it) rather than by object speed. We tested tracking of one, two, and three moving targets while the eyes remained fixed. Variation of the number of distracters and their speed revealed both speed limits and temporal frequency limits on tracking. The temporal frequency limit fell from 7 Hz with one target to 4 Hz with two targets and 2.6 Hz with three targets. The large size of this performance decrease implies that in the two-target condition participants would have done better by tracking only one of the two targets and ignoring the other. These effects are predicted by serial models involving a single tracking focus that must switch among the targets, sampling the position of only one target at a time. If parallel processing theories are to explain why dividing the tracking resource reduces temporal resolution so markedly, supplemental assumptions will be required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23302215     DOI: 10.1167/13.1.12

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  28 in total

1.  Clarifying frequency-dependent brightness enhancement: delta- and theta-band flicker, not alpha-band flicker, consistently seen as brightest.

Authors:  Jennifer K Bertrand; Alexandra A Ouellette Zuk; Craig S Chapman
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-06-06       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Attention Periodically Binds Visual Features As Single Events Depending on Neural Oscillations Phase-Locked to Action.

Authors:  Ryohei Nakayama; Isamu Motoyoshi
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-03-18       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Why do people appear not to extrapolate trajectories during multiple object tracking? A computational investigation.

Authors:  Sheng-Hua Zhong; Zheng Ma; Colin Wilson; Yan Liu; Jonathan I Flombaum
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2014-10-13       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Neural Mechanisms of Sustained Attention Are Rhythmic.

Authors:  Randolph F Helfrich; Ian C Fiebelkorn; Sara M Szczepanski; Jack J Lin; Josef Parvizi; Robert T Knight; Sabine Kastner
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2018-08-22       Impact factor: 17.173

Review 5.  The Common Rhythm of Action and Perception.

Authors:  Alessandro Benedetto; Maria Concetta Morrone; Alice Tomassini
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  Theta oscillations shift towards optimal frequency for cognitive control.

Authors:  Mehdi Senoussi; Pieter Verbeke; Kobe Desender; Esther De Loof; Durk Talsma; Tom Verguts
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2022-04-21

Review 7.  Rhythms for Cognition: Communication through Coherence.

Authors:  Pascal Fries
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2015-10-07       Impact factor: 17.173

8.  Bottlenecks of motion processing during a visual glance: the leaky flask model.

Authors:  Haluk Öğmen; Onur Ekiz; Duong Huynh; Harold E Bedell; Srimant P Tripathy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-31       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  The Dynamics and Neural Correlates of Audio-Visual Integration Capacity as Determined by Temporal Unpredictability, Proactive Interference, and SOA.

Authors:  Jonathan M P Wilbiks; Benjamin J Dyson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  The temporal window of individuation limits visual capacity.

Authors:  Andreas Wutz; David Melcher
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-08-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.