Search

BackgroundThe reduced ability to identify a second target when it is presented in close temporal succession of a first target is called the attentional blink (AB). Studies have shown large individual differences in AB task performance, where lower task performance has been associated with more reversed order reports of both targets if these were presented in direct succession. In order to study the suggestion that reversed order reports reflect loss of temporal information, in the current study, we investigated whether individuals with a larger AB have a higher tendency to temporally integrate both targets into one visual event by using an AB paradigm containing symbol target stimuli.Methodology/Principal FindingsIndeed, we found a positive relation between the tendency to temporally integrate information and individual AB magnitude. In contrast to earlier work, we found no relation between order reversals and individual AB magnitude. The occurrence of temporal integration was negatively related to the number of order reversals, indicating that individuals either integrated or separated and reversed information.ConclusionWe conclude that individuals with better AB task performance use a shorter time window to integrate information, and therefore have higher preservation of temporal information. Furthermore, order reversals observed in paradigms with alphanumeric targets indeed seem to at least partially reflect temporal integration of both targets. Given the negative relation between temporal integration and 'true' order reversals observed with the current symbolic target set, these two behavioral outcomes seem to be two sides of the same coin.

BackgroundAttention is restricted for the second of two targets when it is presented within 200-500 ms of the first target. This attentional blink (AB) phenomenon allows one to study the dynamics of temporal selective attention by varying the interval between the two targets (T1 and T2). Whereas the AB has long been considered as a robust and universal cognitive limitation, several studies have demonstrated that AB task performance greatly differs between individuals, with some individuals showing no AB whatsoever.Methodology/Principal FindingsHere, we studied these individual differences in AB task performance in relation to differences in attentional timing. Furthermore, we investigated whether AB magnitude is predictive for the amount of attention allocated to T1. For both these purposes pupil dilation was measured, and analyzed with our recently developed deconvolution method. We found that the dynamics of temporal attention in small versus large blinkers differ in a number of ways. Individuals with a relatively small AB magnitude seem better able to preserve temporal order information. In addition, they are quicker to allocate attention to both T1 and T2 than large blinkers. Although a popular explanation of the AB is that it is caused by an unnecessary overinvestment of attention allocated to T1, a more complex picture emerged from our data, suggesting that this may depend on whether one is a small or a large blinker.ConclusionThe use of pupil dilation deconvolution seems to be a powerful approach to study the temporal dynamics of attention, bringing us a step closer to understanding the elusive nature of the AB. We conclude that the timing of attention to targets may be more important than the amount of allocated attention in accounting for individual differences.

Background: When two targets are presented in close temporal succession, the majority of people frequently fail to report the second target. This phenomenon, known as the 'attentional blink' (AB), has been a major topic in attention research for the past twenty years because it is informative about the rate at which stimuli can be encoded into consciously accessible representations. An aspect of the AB that has long been ignored, however, is individual differences.Methodology/Principal Findings: Here we compare a group of blinkers (who show an AB) and non-blinkers (who show little or no AB), and investigate the boundary conditions of the non-blinkers' remarkable ability. Second, we directly test the properties of temporal selection by analysing response errors, allowing us to uncover individual differences in suppression, delay, and diffusion of selective attention across time. Thirdly, we test the hypothesis that information concerning temporal order is compromised when an AB is somehow avoided. Surprisingly, compared to earlier studies, only a modest amount of suppression was found for blinkers. Non-blinkers showed no suppression, were more precise in selecting the second target, and made less order reversals than blinkers did. In contrast, non-blinkers made relatively more intrusions and showed a selection delay when the second target immediately followed the first target (at lag 1).Conclusion/Significance: The findings shed new light on the mechanisms that may underlie individual differences in selective attention. The notable ability of non-blinkers to accurately perceive targets presented in close temporal succession might be due to a relatively faster and more precise target selection process compared to large blinkers.

One of the major topics in attention literature is the attentional blink (AB), which demonstrates a limited ability to identify the second of two targets (T1 and T2) when presented in close temporal succession (200–500 msec). Given that the effect has been thought of as robust and resistant to training for over two decades, one of the most remarkable findings in recent years is that the AB can be eliminated after a 1-hr training with a color-salient T2. However, the underlying mechanism of the training effect as well as the AB itself is as of yet still poorly understood. To elucidate this training effect, we employed a refined version of our recently developed pupil dilation deconvolution method to track any training-induced changes in the amount and onset of attentional processing in response to target stimuli. Behaviorally, we replicated the original training effect with a color-salient T2. However, we showed that training without a salient target, but with a consistent short target interval, is already sufficient to attenuate the AB. Pupil deconvolution did not reveal any posttraining changes in T2-related dilation but instead an earlier onset of dilation around T1. Moreover, normalized pupil dilation was enhanced posttraining compared with pretraining. We conclude that the AB can be eliminated by training without a salient cue. Furthermore, our data point to the existence of temporal expectations at the time points of the trained targets posttraining. Therefore, we tentatively conclude that temporal expectations arise as a result of training.