Selective attention, arousal, and the theory of signal detection

153 Pages·2016·3.18 MB·English

by  Paula A. Goolkasian

Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and
Retrospective Theses and Dissertations
Dissertations
1974
Selective attention, arousal, and the theory of signal
detection
Paula A. Goolkasian
Iowa State University
Follow this and additional works at:https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd
Part of theExperimental Analysis of Behavior Commons, and thePsychiatry and Psychology
Commons
Recommended Citation
Goolkasian, Paula A., "Selective attention, arousal, and the theory of signal detection " (1974).Retrospective Theses and Dissertations.
6340.
https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/6340
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University
Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University
Digital Repository. For more information, please [email protected].
INFORMATION TO USERS
This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While
the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document
have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original
submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages.
This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent
pages to insure you complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it
is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have
moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a
good image of the page in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being
photographed the photographer followed a definite method in
"sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper
left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from ieft to
right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is
continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until
complete.
4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value,
however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from
"photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver
prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing
the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and
specific pages you wish reproduced.
5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as
received.
Xerox University Microfilms
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106
75-3304
GOOLKASIAN, Paula A., 1948-
SELECTIVE ATTENTION. AROUSAL. AND THE THEORY
OF SIGNAL DETECTION.
Iowa State University, Ph.D., 1974
Psychology, experimental
Xerox University Microfilms,
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48i os
TH!S DSSSERTATÎON HAS BEEN MÎCRCFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED.
Selective attention, arousal, and the
theory of signal detection
by
Paula A. Goolkasian
A Dissertation Submitted to the
Graduate Faculty in Partial Fulfillment of
The Requirements for the Degree of
DOCrOH OF PHILOSOPHY
Major: Psychology
Approved:
Signature was redacted for privacy.
In Charge of Major Work
Signature was redacted for privacy.
For the Major Department
Signature was redacted for privacy.
For the Graduate College
Iowa State University
Ames, Iowa
1974
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION 1
Problem 1
Definition of attention 2
Research program 30
EXPERIMENT I 34
Method 38
Results HH
Discussion 54
EXPERIMENT II 57
Method 58
Results 62
Discussion 74
GENERAL DISCUSSION 77
Relationship between arousal and performance 80
Effects of stressors 82
Motor performance 85
Conclusion 86
REFERENCES 88
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 95
APPENDIX A: ANDVA'S 96
APPENDIX 3: RATING SCALE FOR STUDY II 147
1
INTRODOCriON
Problem
Visual perceptual iemands in daily activities, for exam­
ple driving or walking, consist of simultaneously arriving
stimuli. 3esponsas to these stimuli are complex, and usually
involve coordination of motor and perceptual skills in com­
peting tasks. Under normal conditions execution of these
overlearned behaviors pose few problems for the human infor­
mation processing system. Performance on a number 3f tasks
at once is entirely feasible as long as the processing
demands of each task are low. For example, the driving sita-
ation reguires keeping the car on the road, together with a
constant monitoring of the visual field for cues from possi­
ble sources of collisions, and this is usually performed with
relative ease. What happens, however, when these same tasks
are carried out ia the background of stressful auditory
noise, or under conditions of drowsiness or lack of sleep?
The guestion in a more basic sense involves the ability to
attend to various tasks simultaneously under different levels
of arousal. Does the stressor become a rival for a share of
the processing capacity, and in doing so, cause a decreient
in the systems efficiency to deal with complex tasks? Or is
it the case, that stress somehow facilitates task performance
by selecting a small amount of relevant information for ex­
tended processing, and limiting awareness to extraneous
2
signals that may interface? Or does a third alternative hold
i.e., that stress is handled by the information processing
system without any effect on the attentional lachanism?
Given justification for either of the first tïo alternatives,
what specific changes in attentional processes are brought
about by variations in the general state of arousal. Is the
effect mainly on the amount of stimulus information that can
be attended to at once, or is it more a matter of a change in
the organization and outpat of the response mechanism? Or io
both occur? How are overall motor and perceptual behaviors
affected?
Definition of attention
Distinct notions of attention have been present in psy­
chological tradition since the eighteenth and nineteenth
century philosophers. Leibnitz's apperception refers to the
attentional mechanism serving to select ideas at lower stages
of consciousness. Hamilton, a Scottish philosopher, consid­
ered attention as a "pulling out or in of the tubes (of a
telescope) in accommodating the focus to the object"
(Hamilton, 1883, p. 16 5). Borrowing from these ideas, the
early psychologists experimented with various notions of at­
tention. The structuralists emphasized the "sensory
clearness" aspect which is the process of highlighting or
sustaining attention to certain inputs (Titchener, 1903).
The functionalists referred to attention as the ability to
3
inhibit surroundiag stimuli for the benefit of a few. "At­
tention is taking hold of the mini in clear aad vivid form of
one out of what saems several simultaneously possible objects
or trains of thought" (James, 1918).
These basic conceptualizations of attention are still
the focus of present day thinking. Contemporary research has
largely dealt with two areas; vigilance, study of the
"sustaining" mechanism of attention, and saleçtive_attentioa,
attention viewed as a filtering process. Concern here will
be with the latter approach. Selective attention is defined
as encompassing both a perceptual filter, that controls
sensitivity to incoming stimulus information, and a response
filter, that involves a bias in response faculties toward
particular outputs regardless of the nature of the stimulus
input.
Current theories of selective attention are usually di­
vided into three groups: the information flow models of
Broadbent and Triesman, the Deutsch and Deutsch response se­
lection model, and the single channel theories of
Kristofferson. Senders, and Moray. These theories are dis­
cussed in the first section of this paper.
Theories of attention
Broadbent's (19 58) information flow model is perhaps the
first modern theory of attention. The modal, as it was in­
troduced, consisted of a short term store (S) from which in-
4
formation was passed selectively to a more permanent serial
processor (P). The atteational aspect is necessary because
of the limited capacity of the P system. This limit is
defined in informational terms (bits per second) , and a
filter is postulated in the transition from the S to the P
system to avoid overloading the P system. Broadbent de­
scribes the filter operation as following an all-or-none
rule. The cues that are used for selection are based on
physical features such as intensity, frequency, and modality.
(These physical cues must bypass the filter to perform this
function.) Split span studies provided empirical support far
the all-or-none filter (Broadbent, 1954). Since performance
is higher when digits are recalled by sensory channel rather
than by order of arrival, Broadbent reasoned that selection
must take place during stimulus input. In a dichotic
listening task, the filter selects a channel (ear) from which
information is passed to the P system, and the remaining
signals from the unattended ear are held in the S system.
The efficiency of physical cues as the basis for input selec­
tion was suggested by Cherry's (1953) shadowing studies. Al­
though Ss were aware of the presence of items in the
unattended channel and they noticed variations in intensity
and pitch, they CDuld nat report the content of the message,
nor did they notice changes in language. This suggests that
only physical features are being detected froa the unattended
5
message.
There are a number of experiments, however, that
revealed serious weaknesses in this model. Gray and
Hedderburn (1960) and Yntema and TrasJc (1963) demonstrated
that ear of arrival is not always the most efficient recall
technique in split span studies. Recall by meaning class was
better than ear of arrival (Yntema & Irask, 1963). These
data were a challenge to Broadbent's all-or-none filter. If
only one channel can be attended, how could class be the most
efficient recall technique when items in the same class were
presented simultaneously to both ears!
A second criticism dealt with the information limit of
the P system (Treisman, 1969). If two prose messages are
presented at normal speeds the S can only attend to one, but
a single message given at twice the normal speed is still
intelligible (Cherry. 1953), Also,- experiments using low
approximations-to-English demonstrate that if ttie information
content is doubled, the subjects' shadowing iaproves more
than 50% of the original performance. Thus, Treisman hypoth­
esized that the limit is not in bits per second, but in the
number of physically separate inputs or in the number of sep­
arate sequences of interdependent items that can be followed.
The experiments on the effect of one's own name used ia
a variety of paradigms comprise a third source of criticism
against the all-or-none filter (Moray, 1959; Oswald, Taylor,