Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A model is described to account for the data of Durso, Cooke, Breen, and Schvaneveldt (1987). On the basis of the relative frequency of an item's presentation as a target, the item develops an automatic tendency to attract attention. When stimuli are then displayed, each calls the attention system to a degree determined by its present strength. We assume that attention eventually drifts to the strongest stimulus (which is then given as a response), but in a time determined inversely by the difference in strength between the two strongest stimuli. A version of this model in which the strengths were freely estimated parameters predicted the various elements of the data with good accuracy. In other versions of the model, strength values were derived from assumptions concerning the learning of automatism. Two of these models, quite different in character, captured the major qualitative features of the data. Further empirical tests of the models are suggested.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shiffrin et al. (1988) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: