MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020225520 · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.33.2.285

Masking T1 difficulty: Processing time and the attenional blink.

2007· article· en· W2020225520 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Troy A. W. Visser

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAttentional blinkBottleneckVisual maskingBackward maskingMasking (illustration)Identification (biology)Magnitude (astronomy)Computer sciencePsychologyVisual perceptionCognitionNeurosciencePerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When observers are presented with 2 targets in rapid succession, identification of the 1st is highly accurate, whereas identification of the 2nd is impaired at brief intertarget intervals (i.e., 200-500 ms). This 2nd-target deficit is known as the attentional blink (AB). According to bottleneck models, the AB arises because attending to the 1st target delays allocation of attention to the 2nd target. Thus, these models predict that increasing 1st-target processing time will increase the magnitude of the AB. Previous tests of this prediction have yielded mixed results. The present work suggests that one factor contributing to this uncertainty is masking of the 1st target: When this mask is omitted, processing time and AB magnitude are reliably related. These findings clarify the role of 1st-target masking in the AB and support the validity of the bottleneck account.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & PerformanceSame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207