↓ Skip to main content

The effects of sequential attention shifts within visual working memory

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
The effects of sequential attention shifts within visual working memory
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00965
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qi Li, Jun Saiki

Abstract

Previous studies have shown conflicting data as to whether it is possible to sequentially shift spatial attention among visual working memory (VWM) representations. The present study investigated this issue by asynchronously presenting attentional cues during the retention interval of a change detection task. In particular, we focused on two types of sequential attention shifts: (1) orienting attention to one location, and then withdrawing attention from it, and (2) switching the focus of attention from one location to another. In Experiment 1, a withdrawal cue was presented after a spatial retro-cue to measure the effect of withdrawing attention. The withdrawal cue significantly reduced the cost of invalid spatial cues, but surprisingly, did not attenuate the benefit of valid spatial cues. This indicates that the withdrawal cue only triggered the activation of facilitative components but not inhibitory components of attention. In Experiment 2, two spatial retro-cues were presented successively to examine the effect of switching the focus of attention. We observed equivalent benefits of the first and second spatial cues, suggesting that participants were able to reorient attention from one location to another within VWM, and the reallocation of attention did not attenuate memory at the first-cued location. In Experiment 3, we found that reducing the validity of the preceding spatial cue did lead to a significant reduction in its benefit. However, performance was still better at first-cued locations than at uncued and neutral locations, indicating that the first cue benefit might have been preserved both partially under automatic control and partially under voluntary control. Our findings revealed new properties of dynamic attentional control in VWM maintenance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 3%
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 63 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 23%
Student > Bachelor 10 15%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 12%
Student > Master 8 12%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 43 65%
Neuroscience 7 11%
Engineering 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 11 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 September 2014.
All research outputs
#12,841,494
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#11,708
of 29,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,838
of 237,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#207
of 366 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,672 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
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 237,913 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 366 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.