Effect of aging on measures of visual attention using dual tasks and visual search
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In Canada, as baby boomers age, there will be an increase in the percentage of seniors within the general population (Statistics Canada, 2006). Seniors often have difficulty in performing certain everyday tasks and have greater risk of having health issues. As such, it becomes increasingly important to understand factors that pose difficulty for this group of people. As people get older, many visual functions such as visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and glare are known to deteriorate (Haegerstrom-Portnoy, 2005). However, when considering activities that aid mobility such as driving and walking, vision related variables are not the only ones that create difficulty for older individuals. A sensory variable such as attention, in conjunction with vision, has been shown in previous studies to be a good predictor of difficulties encountered by the elderly (McGwin, Owsley, & Ball, 1998; Owsley, McGwin, Sloane, Stalvey, & Wells, 2001). Moreover, inattention and distraction seem to be common causes of automobile accidents as well as falls. The work load imposed on the working memory can impact distractibility and inattention. \nIn mobility related activities such as driving and walking, individuals perceive objects that are increasing in size. Experiments were designed to investigate the factors that affect the perception of targets that are enlarging in size. Size matching of expanding targets to a previously presented static target, was investigated in a group of younger participants with normal vision using central or peripheral vision. The results show that size estimates differ depending on whether the target appears in the central visual field or in the periphery. The participants respond faster to targets that appear in the periphery compared to those in the centre/midline. \nIn the subsequent set of experiments we compared the performance of younger and older participants using a dual task paradigm where individuals had to perform two tasks concurrently, one of which was to match the size of an enlarging target. Attention was modulated in the dual tasks by varying the difficulty of the secondary task. It has been found that older individuals have difficulty processing multiple visual tasks or performing multiple tasks in general (Pashler, 1994a, 1994b, 1998; Verhaeghen et al., 2003). Compared to younger individuals, older individuals were found to have greater performance difficulty in the highly demanding dual tasks. These results are compared to those observed in studies of psychological refractory period effects. The differences between the young and older individuals are discussed with respect to limited capacity and bottle neck models of attention. Furthermore, eye movement measures in the dual tasks seem to provide evidence of difficulty in task switching for the older observers. \nThe thesis also investigated the functional field of view of younger and older individuals. By assessing the functional field of view (FFOV) using a method employed earlier by Coeckelbergh et al., (2004a), significant overall age related differences were found. Multiple characteristics of what might affect the FFOV as measured by the attended field of view (AFOV) were also investigated (e.g., impact of a pop out distracter and divided attention). It was found that differences between the two age groups occurred in all conditions. The presence of irrelevant distracters had a greater impact on the older individuals compared to the younger group, whereas divided attention or the presence of the pop out distracter did not affect either age group. Attention processing seemed to be similar for both the younger and older individuals and, therefore, the differences between the age groups appear to be at a quantitative level rather than a qualitative level.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».