The attentional blink: increasing target salience provides no evidence for resource depletion. A commentary on Dux, Asplund, and Marois (2008).
The authors have argued elsewhere that the attentional blink (AB; i.e., reduced target detection shortly after presentation of an earlier target) arises from blocked or disrupted perceptual input in response to distractors presented between the targets. When targets replace the intervening distractors, so that three targets (T1, T2, and T3) are presented sequentially, performance on T2 and T3 improves. Dux, Asplund, and Marois (2008) argued that T3 performance improves at the expense of T1, and thus provides evidence for resource depletion. They showed that when T1 is made more salient (and presumably draws more resources), an AB for T3 appears to reemerge. These findings can be better explained, however, by (1) the relationship between T1 and T2 (not T1 and T3) and (2) differential salience for T3 in the long-lag condition of Dux et al.'s study. In conclusion, the Dux et al. study does not present a severe challenge to input control theories of the AB.
Olivers
Christian N L
CN
Department of Cognitive Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. cnl.olivers@psy.vu.nl
Spalek
Thomas M
TM
Kawahara
Jun-Ichiro
J
Di Lollo
Vincent
V
D001288:Attention; D054518:Attentional Blink; D003118:Color Perception; D004192:Discrimination, Psychological; D006801:Humans; D009949:Orientation; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D011601:Psychophysics; D011930:Reaction Time; D012691:Serial Learning