Authors
Jorge Morales
Johns Hopkins University
Abstract
When visual attention is directed away from a stimulus, neural processing is weak and strength and precision of sensory data decreases. From a computational perspective, in such situations observers should give more weight to prior expectations in order to behave optimally during a discrimination task. Here we test a signal detection theoretic model that counter-intuitively predicts subjects will do just the opposite in a discrimination task with two stimuli, one attended and one unattended: when subjects are probed to discriminate the unattended stimulus, they rely less on prior information about the probed stimulus’ identity. The model is in part inspired by recent findings that attention reduces trial-by-trial variability of the neuronal population response and that they use a common criterion for attended and unattended trials. In five different visual discrimination experiments, when attention was directed away from the target stimulus, subjects did not adjust their response bias in reaction to a change in stimulus presentation frequency despite being fully informed and despite the presence of performance feedback and monetary and social incentives. This indicates that subjects did not rely more on the priors under conditions of inattention as would be predicted by a Bayes-optimal observer model. These results inform and constrain future models of Bayesian inference in the human brain.
Keywords Attention  Ideal observer Bayesian models  Divided attention and inattention  Signal detection theory  Cognitive and attentional control
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Neural Mechanisms of Selective Visual Attention.R. Desimone & J. Duncan - 1995 - Annual Review of Neuroscience 18 (1):193-222.
Expectation in Visual Cognition.Christopher Summerfield & Tobias Egner - 2009 - Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13 (9):403-409.
Bayesian Decision Theory in Sensorimotor Control.Konrad P. Körding & Daniel M. Wolpert - 2006 - Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10 (7):319-326.

View all 7 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Does the Corollary Discharge of Attention Exist?J. G. Taylor - 2012 - Consciousness and Cognition 21 (1):325-339.
Perceived Shape at a Slant as a Function of Processing Time and Processing Load.William Epstein, Gary Hatfield & Gerard Muise - 1977 - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 3:473–483.
Attention and the Evolution of Intentional Communication.Ingar Brinck - 2000 - Pragmatics and Cognition 9 (2):259-277.
On Processing in the Inattention Paradigm as Automatic.Joseph Tzelgov - 2000 - PSYCHE: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Research On Consciousness 6.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-11-08

Total views
275 ( #32,720 of 2,438,781 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
15 ( #45,127 of 2,438,781 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes