1 / 4

Neural basis of capacity limits in attention arising from perceptual load

Neural basis of capacity limits in attention arising from perceptual load. Todd Kelley & Nilli Lavie. Rationale. Previous work has established capacity limits in visual attention arising in conditions of high perceptual load (e.g. Lavie, 1995; Schwartz et al., 2005).

aethel
Download Presentation

Neural basis of capacity limits in attention arising from perceptual load

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Neural basis of capacity limits in attention arising from perceptual load Todd Kelley & Nilli Lavie

  2. Rationale • Previous work has established capacity limits in visual attention arising in conditions of high perceptual load (e.g. Lavie, 1995; Schwartz et al., 2005). • Proposed study: establish neural correlates of capacity limits in visual attention. • Use parametric manipulation of visual search load to identify cortical regions whose activity reflects attentional capacity limits • Use high contrast distractor stimuli to examine interaction of attentional load and low-level visual processing.

  3. Y A O O L N O N F W O O T T O X Stimuli and Design • Load manipulated by changing number of angled letters in search array (set size = 2,4,6,8) • Load manipulated across scans; 2 scans per load condition (1 block = 1 scan). • Distractor hemifield blocked within scans Array Size: S = 2 Array Size: S = 8

  4. Data Collection & Analysis • 20 adult subjects (m/f, ages 18-55) • 8 scans; 2 scans per load condition; Scan length: 192 s. • 12 s of fixation at beginning and end of each scan • 4 42 s cycles of L.H. distractor and R.H. distractor • 84 trials/block; ITI = 2s • Full brain coverage; TR = 3 s; TE = 50 ms; 3mm cubic voxels • Examine activity in regions more active under high load than low load • Examine distractor-related response as a function of load. Likely point of asymptote, given behavioural data

More Related