Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The present paper addresses the efficiency with which stimulus-driven attentional capture can interfere with target detection by older and younger observers. The attentional capture paradigm places the stimulus-driven visual selection of perceptually salient objects in opposition to the goal-directed visual selection of objects that possess a target feature. Eighteen older adults and 17 younger adults completed a perceptual feature search experiment that utilized the attentional capture paradigm. Participants searched for a target color in an eight-item display that contained six identical distractors and one singleton distractor. No evidence for age-related differences in the ability to ignore the perceptually salient, but irrelevant singleton distractor were observed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ball

K. K.

Beard

B. L.

Roenker

D. L.

Miller

R. L.

Griggs

D. S.

(1988). Age and visual search: Expanding the useful field of view. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 5, 2210–2219.

Hasher

Zacks

R. T.

(1988). Working memory, comprehension, and aging: A review and a new view. In Bower

G. H.

, The psychology of learning and motivation_(Vol. 22, pp. 193–225). San Diego: Academic Press.

Madden

D. J.

(1992). Selective attention and visual search: Revision of an allocation model and application to age differences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 821–836.

Maylor

E. A.

Lavie

(1998). The influence of perceptual load on age differences in selective attention. Psychology and Aging, 13, 563–573.

Mead

S. E.

(2000). Contributions of stimulus-driven and goal-directed processing to visual selection by older and younger observers. Unpublished dissertation. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.

Mead

S. E.

Fisk

A. D.

(1997). Effects of matching cognitive and perceptual-motor training to task components on complex task performance by older and younger adults. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 41st Annual Meeting (pp. 115–119), Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

Pan

Eriksen

C. W.

(1993). Attentional distribution in the visual field during same- different judgments as assessed by response competition. Perception and Psychophysics, 53, 134–144.

Plude

D. J.

Doussard-Roosevelt

J. A.

(1989). Aging, selective attention, and feature integration. Psychology and Aging, 4, 98–105.

Posner

M. I.

(1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 3–25.

10.

Tsal

(1983). Movement of attention across the visual field. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 523–530.

11.

Theeuwes

(1992). Perceptual selectivity for color and form. Perception and Psychophysics, 51, 599–606.

12.

Wright

L. L.

Elias

J. W.

(1979). Age differences in the effects of perceptual noise. Journal of Gerontology, 34, 704–708.

13.

Yantis

(1996). Attentional capture in vision. In Kramer

A. F.

Coles

M. G. H.

Logan

G. D.

, Converging Operations in the Study of Visual Selective Attention (pp. 45–76). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Aging and the Efficiency of Stimulus-Driven and Goal-Directed Visual Selection

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References