61 resultados para Ticket costs
Resumo:
When people monitor a visual stream of rapidly presented stimuli for two targets (T1 and T2), they often miss T2 if it falls into a time window of about half a second after T1 onset-the attentional blink. However, if T2 immediately follows T1, performance is often reported being as good as that at long lags-the so-called Lag-1 sparing effect. Two experiments investigated the mechanisms underlying this effect. Experiment 1 showed that, at Lag 1, requiring subjects to correctly report both identity and temporal order of targets produces relatively good performance on T2 but relatively bad performance on T1. Experiment 2 confirmed that subjects often confuse target order at short lags, especially if the two targets are equally easy to discriminate. Results suggest that, if two targets appear in close succession, they compete for attentional resources. If the two competitors are of unequal strength the stronger one is more likely to win and be reported at the expense of the other. If the two are equally strong, however, they will often be integrated into the same attentional episode and thus get both access to attentional resources. But this comes with a cost, as it eliminates information about the targets' temporal order.
Resumo:
In this paper, we introduce a special issue about unique and shared mechanisms underlying the performance limitations observed in dual tasks. In particular, the relationship between task-switching costs, the attentional-blink effect, and the psychological refractory period effect is reviewed. These costs are traditionally attributed to fixed and unique capacity limitations for task set reconfiguration, target identification, and response selection, respectively However, we argue that more global attentional processes play a role that cuts across these paradigms. This is reason for a more paradigm-independent approach to processing limitations in dual tasks.
