↓ Skip to main content

Distinct Contributions of Attention and Working Memory to Visual Statistical Learning and Ensemble Processing

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception & Performance, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Distinct Contributions of Attention and Working Memory to Visual Statistical Learning and Ensemble Processing
Published in
Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception & Performance, January 2015
DOI 10.1037/xhp0000069
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle G. Hall, Jason B. Mattingley, Paul E. Dux

Abstract

The brain exploits redundancies in the environment to efficiently represent the complexity of the visual world. One example of this is ensemble processing, which provides a statistical summary of elements within a set (e.g., mean size). Another is statistical learning, which involves the encoding of stable spatial or temporal relationships between objects. It has been suggested that ensemble processing over arrays of oriented lines disrupts statistical learning of structure within the arrays (Zhao, Ngo, McKendrick, & Turk-Browne, 2011). Here we asked whether ensemble processing and statistical learning are mutually incompatible, or whether this disruption might occur because ensemble processing encourages participants to process the stimulus arrays in a way that impedes statistical learning. In Experiment 1, we replicated Zhao and colleagues' finding that ensemble processing disrupts statistical learning. In Experiments 2 and 3, we found that statistical learning was unimpaired by ensemble processing when task demands necessitated (a) focal attention to individual items within the stimulus arrays and (b) the retention of individual items in working memory. Together, these results are consistent with an account suggesting that ensemble processing and statistical learning can operate over the same stimuli given appropriate stimulus processing demands during exposure to regularities. (PsycINFO Database Record

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Iceland 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 92 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 21%
Researcher 13 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 18 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 52 54%
Neuroscience 10 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 23 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 September 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception & Performance
#1,030
of 3,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,156
of 359,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception & Performance
#55
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,097 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 359,515 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.