Telephone conversations affect the executive but not the alerting or orienting network.

Previous work has shown that talking on a mobile phone leads to an impairment of visual attention. Gunnell et al. (2020) investigated the locus of these dual-task impairments and found that although phone conversations led to cognitive delays in response times, other mechanisms underlying particular selective attention tasks were unaffected. Here, we investigated which attentional networks, if any, were impaired by having a phone conversation. We used the attentional network task (ANT) to evaluate performance of the alerting, orienting, and executive attentional networks, both in conditions where people were engaged in a conversation and where they were silent. Two experiments showed that there was a robust delay in response across all three networks. However, at the individual network level, holding a conversation did not influence the size of the alerting or orienting effects but it did reduce the size of the conflict effect within the executive network. The findings suggest that holding a conversation can reduce the overall speed of responding and, via its influence on the executive network, can reduce the amount of information that can be processed from the environment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Having a phone conversation delays but does not disrupt cognitive mechanisms.

Previous research has shown that talking on a mobile phone leads to impairments in a number of cognitive tasks. However, it is not yet known whether the act of conversation disrupts the underlying cognitive mechanisms (the Cognitive Disruption hypothesis) or leads to a delay in response due to a limit on central cognitive resources (the Cognitive Delay hypothesis). We investigated this here using two cognitive search tasks that investigate spatial learning and time-based selection: Contextual Cueing and Visual Marking. In Contextual Cueing, responses to repeated displays are faster than those to novel displays. In Visual Marking, participants prioritize attention to new information and deprioritize old, unimportant information (the Preview Benefit). Experiments 1 to 3 investigated whether Contextual Cueing occurred while people were engaged in a phone conversation, whereas Experiments 4 to 6 investigated whether a Preview Benefit occurred, again while people were engaged in conversation. The results showed that having a conversation did not interfere with the mechanisms underlying spatial learning or time-based selection. However, in all experiments there was a significant increase in response times. The results are consistent with a Cognitive Delay account explaining the dual-task cost of having a phone conversation on concurrent cognitive tasks. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

The hazards of perception: evaluating a change blindness demonstration within a real-world driver education course.

Overconfidence in one's driving ability can lead to risky decision-making and may therefore increase the accident risk. When educating people about the risks of their driving behavior, it is all too easy for individuals to assume that the message is not meant for them and so can be ignored. In this study we developed and assessed the effect of a road safety demonstration based around the phenomenon of change blindness within a real-world Driver Awareness Course. We collected quantitative and qualitative data to evaluate the effectiveness of the demonstration in both a police-led environment (Experiment 1) and a laboratory environment (Experiment 2). We also compared the change blindness intervention to two control tasks. The results showed that participants' self-reported ability to spot important visual changes was reduced after the change blindness demonstration in both experiments, but was not reduced after participation in the control tasks of Experiment 2. Furthermore, participants described the change blindness demonstrations positively and would recommend that they were shown more widely.

Blink and you won't miss it: the preview benefit in visual marking survives internally generated eyeblinks.

People are able to ignore old (previewed) stimuli in order to prioritize the processing of newly appearing items--the preview benefit (D. G. Watson & G. W. Humphreys, 1997, "Visual marking: prioritizing selection for new objects by top-down attentional inhibition of old objects," Psychological Review, Vol. 104, pp. 90-122). According to the inhibitory visual marking account, this is achieved by the top-down and capacity-limited inhibition of old stimuli already in the field, which leads to a selection advantage for new items when they appear. In contrast, according to the abrupt luminance onset account (M. Donk & J. Theeuwes, 2001, "Visual marking beside the mark: prioritizing selection by abrupt onsets," Perception & Psychophysics, Vol. 63, pp. 891-900), new items capture attention automatically simply because they generate luminance onset signals. Here, we demonstrate that new items can be partially prioritized over old items even when they appear during an eyeblink and so have no unique luminance transients associated with their appearance. Overall, the findings suggest that both the inhibition of old items and attention capture by luminance changes contribute to time-based selection.