The development of visual filtering: attentional modulation in the temporal context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of the ability to filter extraneous information in order to attend to the most relevant information is crucial for optimal information processing and affects every aspect of children's functioning, including educational activities and social interactions. In order to assess the development of filtering, two tasks in which the target and distracting stimuli were presented at different times were used to measure the speed of target identification among children aged 5 to 12 years and a group of adults. Temporal differences in the onset of the target and distractors were used to assess issues of attention control in a real-world context, in which attention must be maintained over time. In Experiment 1, the flankers varied with regard to proximity to the target in order to assess the ability of participants to optimally narrow their focus of attention in the context of varying time of onset between the flankers and target (simultaneous with [0 ms] or 150, 300, 450 ms after the target). Differences in response time as a function of proximity were observed among the group of 5-6 year olds but not in the older participants. In Experiment 2, the influence of stimulus-based characteristics on filtering was examined in a temporal context such that flankers appeared before (150, 300, 450 ms), simultaneous with (0 ms), or after (150, 300, 450 ms) the target. The measures of FCEs included Feature Number, Feature Compatibility, Response Competition, and Stimulus Generalization. Increased Feature Number was associated with facilitation across age groups when flankers appeared before the target. Evidence of facilitation from Stimulus Generalization was also found in the group of 5-6 and 7-9 year olds and Feature Compatibility was associated with interference in all age groups. Evidence of Response Competition was observed among adults. Overall, the results are consistent with the notion that children are less efficient in their ability to filter attention compared to adults and that both spatial and temporal factors influence the nature of developmental effects.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".