Citation

Eayrs JO, Lavie N. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 2021; 47(9): 1149-1165.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2021, American Psychological Association)

DOI

10.1037/xhp0000823

PMID

34694846

Abstract

Attention is limited, both in processing capacity (leading to phenomena of "inattentional blindness") and in the capacity for selective focus (leading to distraction). Load theory (e.g., Lavie, 1995) accounts for both limitations by proposing that perceptual processing has limited capacity but proceeds automatically and in parallel on all stimuli within capacity. Here we tested these claims by applying load theory to the phenomenon of "subitizing": the parallel detection and individuation of a limited number of items, established in enumeration research. We predicted that distractor interference will be found within but not beyond a person's subitizing capacity (measured as the transition from parallel to serial slope). Participants reported the number of target shapes from brief displays while ignoring irrelevant cartoon-image distractors. As predicted, distractor cost on enumeration performance was found within subitizing capacity and eliminated in larger set sizes. Moreover, individual differences results demonstrated that distractor effects depended on an individual's capacity (i.e., their serial-to-parallel transition point), rather than on set size per se. These results provide new evidence for the load theory hypotheses that perceptual processing is automatic and parallel within its limited capacity, while extending it to account for selective attention during enumeration. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Language: en