Influence of Distraction on Task Performance in Children and Adults
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 Influence of Distraction on Task Performance in Children and Adults Liza Timmermans S767534 Master thesis Augustus 2010 Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences Department of Developmental Psychology Tilburg University Begeleider: dr. O. van der Stelt Tweede beoordelaar: drs. W. Brinkmann 2 Abstract Previous studies found that children experience larger distractor effects on task performance than young adults, but only under conditions of low perceptual load. In this study the influence of distraction in children and adults in context of perceptual load theory of visual attention (Lavie, 1995) will be examined. Participants consisted of 16 adults ( M = 21 years) and 9 children (M = 8 years) who completed three visual attention tasks differing in load. Each task was combined with two types of distraction. The results showed that distraction had a positive influence on the RTs of children and adults. On the other hand, distraction also increased the false alarm rates of both groups. Also, in contrast to perceptual load theory, a positive influence of distraction on hit rate was found in the high load task. It is concluded that both children and adults can experience negative as well as positive influence of distracting task irrelevant stimuli on task performance, depending on measures of performance and type of distraction. Keywords: Selective attention, distraction, development 3 Index Abstract 2 Index 3 Introduction 4 Attention 4 Development of selective attention 6 Present study 7 Method 8 Participants 8 Procedure 9 Data processing 11 Statistical analyses 11 Results 12 Reaction time 13 Hit rate 14 False alarm rate 15 Discussion 17 References 20 4 Introduction William James was one of the first psychologists who saw psychology as the study of mental activity (functionalism). Functionalists were interested in the functions of mental processes including, perception, memory, attention, and, consciousness. In his textbook, The Principles of Psychology , James (1890) described attention as follows “Everyone knows what attention is. It is the taking possession by the mind, in clear and vivid form, of one out of what seem several simultaneously possible objects or trains of thought”. Later, when functionalism was declined by behaviorism (in behaviorism the idea of studying internal mental processes is rejected), attention was no longer a main topic in psychology. In the nineteen fifties and sixties cognitive psychology emerged and attention became relevant again and has been a widely studied topic ever since. Attention is a cognitive function that refers to the ability to actively process specific stimuli. Selective attention is “the generic term for those mechanisms which lead our experience to be dominated by one thing rather than another” (Driver, 2001 p. 53). Selective attention is important for many other cognitive functions such as perception and memory. Attention is considered one of the basic abilities that is required to succeed in school (Huang-Pollock, Carr, & Nigg, 2002). Similarly, a deficit in attention is a hallmark symptom in multiple neurological and psychiatric disorders, such as attention- deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). More insight in these disorders is obtained by studying attention. Thus, the study of attention is important for theoretical as well as clinical reasons. Attention Traditionally there are two theories about selective attention: early selection theory and late selection theory. Broadbent’s (1958) filter theory, which is a classical example of the early selection theory, states that there are two stages of perceptual processing. In the first stage physical features (such as color and orientation) are extracted for all incoming stimuli and in the second stage more complex features are extracted. This second stage is limited in capacity and a selective filter protects this stage from overload by only passing trough stimuli with a specific physical feature (Broadbent, 5 1958; Driver, 2001; Huang-Pollock et al., 2002). Thus, unattended stimuli are only processed as far as physical features and are temporarily stored in immediate memory, whereas attended stimuli are also processed at a semantic level and can be stored in the long term memory or can be used to react appropriately to the stimuli (Lachter, Foster, & Ruthruff, 2004). Important evidence for this theory comes from selective shadowing tasks that are used in many classical experiments. In such a task participants have to listen to two spoken messages at the same time and repeat (shadow) one, it appears that participants know very little about the non-shadowed message (Driver, 2001). On the other hand, the late selection theory states that all incoming stimuli receive automatic full perception and selection only occurs after semantic processing. Unattended stimuli are thus fully processed and limitations arise only at the levels of decision making and response selection (Deutsch & Deutsch, 1963; Driver, 2001). An important evidence for this theory is the so called “own name effect” which is found in dichotic listening tasks where the subject’s name draws attention even if presented in the unattended ear (Driver, 2001). More recent theories on attention combine aspects of early selection theory and late selection theory. Lavie’s (1995) perceptual load theory is the most important one. This theory states that perception is a limited process (as in early selection) and that perception is an automatic process (as in late selection). Whether selection is early or late depends on perceptual load. The concept of perceptual load implies not just increased difficulty but rather additional demands on (cognitive) systems and their capacity (Lavie, 1995). Lavie (1995) constructed an experiment to examine perceptual load theory. In this experiment participants had to respond to the identity of the target letter, x or z, that appeared in the central region of the screen. Far from the target letter, below or above the center, a compatible, incompatible or neutral distracter letter appeared. It is known that task irrelevant distracter stimuli shown simultaneously with or just before the task relevant stimuli interfere with the processing of the task relevant stimuli (Wetzel & Schröger, 2007). These distracter stimuli have multiple effects on performance, such as longer reaction times and more errors. The manipulation of load in Lavie’s (1995) experiment appeared in the central region; in the low load condition only the target letter was shown in one of six positions and in the high load condition the other five positions 6 were occupied by neutral non target letters. The results showed that if perceptual load is low, there is perceptual capacity left and the distracter stimuli can be processed. In this case selection is late. If perceptual load is high, perceptual capacity may be exhausted and therefore less distracter stimuli will be processed and perceptual selection is early (Lavie, 1995; Lavie, 2005; Driver, 2001). Development of Selective Attention Research suggests that attention, like many other cognitive functions, involves developmental change. In their review, Plude, Enns, and Brodeur (1994) conclude that the development of attention is a complex pattern of growth and development rather than a single linear progression. From childhood till adulthood some aspects of attention will change significantly. Filtering and visual search, for example, change over the life span while other aspects (like orienting) will stay remarkably stable (Plude et al., 1994). The control over the processing of distracting stimuli is not completely mature in childhood, suggesting that children are more susceptible to distracting stimuli compared to young adults. For instance, when distraction is present the RTs of children were more prolonged than the RTs of adults (Wetzel, Widmann, Schröger; 2009). Furthermore, there are strong age-related improvements in the ability to focus on the central task and to ignore distracter stimuli (Plude et al., 1994; Tipper, Bourque, Anderson, & Brehaut, 1989). Maylor and Lavie (1998) applied the perceptual load theory to development and compared two groups, young adults (mean age 22.7) and older adults (mean age 73.0). Participants had to detect a target letter and ignore the incompatible or neutral distracter letter. In this study there were four conditions of load, either none, one, three, or five non target letters were displayed simultaneously with the target letter. The more letters appeared, the higher the load of the task. The results showed that compared to the young adults, older adults experienced a larger distracter effect, but only under conditions of low perceptual load. The distracter effect was reduced by set size four in the case of the older adults and by set size six for the younger adults. Huang-Pollock et al. (2002) also tested the perceptual load theory in combination with development. Children and young adults were tested using a task obtained from Maylor and Lavie (1998). The results showed that children as well as adults experienced 7 smaller interference effects from display load four to display load six. More specifically, children experienced large distracter effects from an incompatible distracter letter at low loads and for high loads these distracter effects were considerably smaller, and the resistance to distracter letters approached adult levels (Huang-Pollock et al., 2002). The same results of developmental change in selective attention are thus found in comparing young adults and older adults