Does threatening stimuli capture attention? A modification of a Posner paradigm task.
Theories of what controls and captures attention have been investigated for years. Experiments have
been criticised for not having any external validity, and as a result this experiment aims to investigate
the effects of threatening stimuli on capturing attention. A within participants 2x2x2 AFC design was
used. A basic Posner paradigm was modified with threatening or non-threatening images appearing
as a cue to the target. The response times to the target were measures for valid/invalid trials,
threatening/ non-threatening stimuli and right/left visual field. No significant effects were found for
validity, hemifield or threat. The possible explanations and implications of the results are discussed.
INTRODUCTION
Attention is one of the most widely researched phenomena in psychology, as at all times, the visual
system is bombarded with vast amounts of information which we have to decide what to attend to.
This is either active and in our control or passive. In 1866 Helmholtz proposed that fixation and
attention were not the same thing, and one can be fixating on one thing, but attending to something
else. (Wolfe et al 2009). Therefore, it became possible to investigate differences between what
someone is fixating on, and what they are attending to. Experiments can ask participants to fixate on a
certain point whilst seeing what else in the visual field they will attend to.
Preattentive processing performs basic analysis to segment the visual scene. (Kochla & Ullman,
1985). Preattentive attention can either be endogenous, i.e. actively directed, or exogenous which is
voluntary and driven by stimuli. (Carrasco & Yeshurun 2009). Posner (1980) aimed to further explore
this aspect of cognition, and investigate the effects of exogenous or endogenous processing in the
orienting of attention in space. Based on the fundamental assumption that if you attend to something,
response times to events at the same location will be facilitated (Eriksen & Hoffman 1972), Posner
prepared a paradigm to test participant’s reaction times to targets. The target would appear on either
the left or right of a fixation cross. Before the target, a cue either central (i.e. an arrow) or peripheral
(i.e. the highlighting of the box) would appear. The cue was either in the same location as the target
(valid) or the opposite location (invalid).
Theories of what controls and captures attention have been investigated for years. Experiments have
been criticised for not having any external validity, and as a result this experiment aims to investigate
the effects of threatening stimuli on capturing attention. A within participants 2x2x2 AFC design was
used. A basic Posner paradigm was modified with threatening or non-threatening images appearing
as a cue to the target. The response times to the target were measures for valid/invalid trials,
threatening/ non-threatening stimuli and right/left visual field. No significant effects were found for
validity, hemifield or threat. The possible explanations and implications of the results are discussed.
INTRODUCTION
Attention is one of the most widely researched phenomena in psychology, as at all times, the visual
system is bombarded with vast amounts of information which we have to decide what to attend to.
This is either active and in our control or passive. In 1866 Helmholtz proposed that fixation and
attention were not the same thing, and one can be fixating on one thing, but attending to something
else. (Wolfe et al 2009). Therefore, it became possible to investigate differences between what
someone is fixating on, and what they are attending to. Experiments can ask participants to fixate on a
certain point whilst seeing what else in the visual field they will attend to.
Preattentive processing performs basic analysis to segment the visual scene. (Kochla & Ullman,
1985). Preattentive attention can either be endogenous, i.e. actively directed, or exogenous which is
voluntary and driven by stimuli. (Carrasco & Yeshurun 2009). Posner (1980) aimed to further explore
this aspect of cognition, and investigate the effects of exogenous or endogenous processing in the
orienting of attention in space. Based on the fundamental assumption that if you attend to something,
response times to events at the same location will be facilitated (Eriksen & Hoffman 1972), Posner
prepared a paradigm to test participant’s reaction times to targets. The target would appear on either
the left or right of a fixation cross. Before the target, a cue either central (i.e. an arrow) or peripheral
(i.e. the highlighting of the box) would appear. The cue was either in the same location as the target
(valid) or the opposite location (invalid).
