Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Alan Cummins Student No: 1165236 Course: PSY283 Lecturer: Dr. Garry Prentice
2
Abstract
This experiment seeks to determine the effect of focused versus divided attention on
the recall of words. Words are presented in auditory or auditory and visual form and
randomly played in either left or right ear. Twenty-two participants took part and a control
group was sued to determine how divided attention differs from focused attention. The
experimental group was then compared inter and intra-group, in a between subjects group
design, to highlight how the theories of selective attention, predominantly Broadbent’s Filter
attenuation model are applicable to attention. The dependent variable is the number of words
recalled in each ear. The independent variables are that of the differing randomly chosen
groups who were provided with words in a fashion in comparison with those who were
provided with the words in a mixture of visual and auditory stimuli. It was found that mixed
modality stimuli aid in the focused attention and recall of words over and above a single
stimulus, such as audio in this experiment. Broadbent’s theory of a filter attenuation model
was found to be lacking in relation to the experimental results found however. Even with
focused attention on a single ear, information from the unattended ear was still processed at
some level.
Contents
Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 4
Method....................................................................................................................................... 6
Results ....................................................................................................................................... 9
Discussion ............................................................................................................................... 13
References ............................................................................................................................... 16
Introduction
Attention can be split into study of two different but related areas of experimentation.
Focused attention is studied by presented participants with two or more stimuli and
instructing them to respond to only one as in Cherry (1953) whereas divided attention is
studied by presenting two or more stimuli and requesting participants to attend to all stimuli,
such as detailed by Norman and Shallice (1986). However Hampson (1989) has suggested
that factors such as presenting stimuli in different modalities that can aid focused attention
also can aid selective attention as well. There are several theories of selective attention which
are based on trying to shadow information in a selective manner. The information processed
at some point must hit a bottleneck or filter at which point it is no longer shadowed and
attention is given fully the requested stimuli. The main theories are that of Broadbent’s Filter
model (1958), Triesman’s Attenuator model (1964) and the Pertinence model of Deutsch and
Deutsch (1963) which each moving this filter further back in processing. This experiment
focuses on Broadbent’s Filter theory which proposes that the bottleneck occurs very early in
processing and is based on the physical properties of the stimuli e.g. speaker’s tone, words,
volume, brightness, intensity and novelty. This experiment will test Broadbent’s assertion that
no processing will be given to an unattended ear by trying to force the user to give full
attention to the ear in which visual and auditory words are presented. The experiment uses
cross-modal stimuli to determine how this concept of a filter of attention can be extended out
experiment which focused on the aural modality only. Driver and Spence (1998) have already
carried out work on determining how different modalities can positively and negatively affect
attention.
The hypotheses under investigation in relation to accurate word recall and the effect
of focused versus divided attention for these experiments are stated as such:
recalled words from the right ear when comparing the two groups, the audio-visual group and
the audio-only group. Specifically there will be a positive increase in the number of words
correctly recalled in the right ear of the audio-visual group as they have been given focused
Alternate hypothesis: There will be a significant positive difference in the number of correctly
recalled words in the right ear as compared to the left ear in the audio-visual group.
Filter Attenuation Theory that there is a zero correct recall of words from the left ear as
Alternate Hypothesis: There will be no significant difference between the number of correctly
recalled words for the right and left ear for the control group of audio-only presentation. That
Method
Materials
• Windows Computer: Used to display and play each word, one per participant.
• Software lab: In which each of the groups could perform the experiment.
• Stop-watch: To time both the period of time words were displayed and the recall
period allowed.
Participants
The Total Sample Size was twenty-two Psychology students from Dublin Business
School (n=22). There were two groups corresponding to the audio and visual focused
attention and the audio only divided attention stimuli. The audio and visual group comprised
of 12 students. The audio only group comprised 10 students. The participants for each group
were randomly chosen by each drawing from a bag of poker chips which corresponded to one
Design
The design method used for this experiment was a “Between Subject Groups” design.
This consisted of two groups, containing randomly assigned participants, taking part in an
attention experiment. The control group consisted of those that would only hear words in
either ear while the experimental group consisted of those who would randomly hear words in
both ears but who would also see words displayed on screen while they were being played in
their right ear. The dependent variable was that of the number of words recalled in each ear.
The independent variable was that of the groups who could hear the provided words versus
Procedure
1. Participants were randomly allocated to the two required groups by choosing from
2. Each group was told to await their allotted time to carry out the experiment.
3. The control group, which would only hear words randomly played in their left and
right ear, went first. The experimental group carried out the experiment afterwards.
5. Each participant was given a recall sheet and instructed not to write anything on these
7. Each participant was given a headphone set and requested to check that they could
hear audio.
8. The instructions were then read aloud for the participants as follows: “Pay attention to
the words presented in audio and visual format, depending on the group you have
been randomly assigned to, as you will be asked to recall words at the end. There
shall be a 3 second pause between words and once all words have been presented you
will be given 2 minutes to recall as many words as possible. The words will be
displayed on the screen in white on a black background. There are thirty words in
9. Once all the words had been presented the participants were indicated to begin recall
10. After two minutes the participants were asked to stop writing and the recall sheets
were collected.
11. The participants were thanked for their participation and briefly told that the
12. They were instructed to not discuss the experiment, procedures and instructions with
13. Once all groups had carried out the experiment, all recall sheets were collated and the
Results
Figure 3 reports the mean number of words correctly recalled from both right and left
ear as split by the audio-only versus audio and visual word presentation groups.
Comparing the average number of correctly recalled words in the right ear for the
audio and visual experimental group as against the right ear in the audio-only control group:
This indicates that there was a large difference between the two groups with regard to correct
recall of words from the right ear. It should be noted that there is a higher standard deviation
Comparing the average number of correctly recalled words in the left ear for the
audio and visual experimental group as against the left ear in the audio-only control group:
This indicates that there was little difference between the two groups with regard to correct
Comparing the average number of correctly recalled words in the left and right ear of
Comparing the number of correctly recalled words in the right ear to the left ear for
This appears to suggest that there was little difference in the recall of words that were given
extra emphasis, namely those in the right ear, which had a visual cue provided as well as a
9
8
7
6
5 Words Recalled Left Ear
4
3 Words Recalled Right Ear
2
1
0 2 4 6
No. Words Recalled
FIGURE 1 - BAR GRAPH OF RECALL OF WORDS ACCORDING TO RIGHT AND LEFT EARS FOR AUDIO AND
Figure 1 indicates that there were a fairly even number of correctly recalled words for
the audio-visual group across both ears. However, it should be noted that participants 10 and
11 could not recall any words from their left ear which indicates that they paid full and
8
7
6
5
4 Words Recalled Left Ear
3 Words Recalled Right Ear
2
1
0 2 4 6 8
No. Words Recalled
FIGURE 2 - RECALL OF WORDS ACCORDING TO RIGHT AND LEFT EARS FOR THE AUDIO ONLY DIVIDED
ATTENTION GROUP
Figure 2 indicates that there were in general a higher number of words recalled from
the left ear as opposed to the right ear for the audio-only control group. It was expected that
there would be a parity of correctly recalled words in each ear but the left ear seems to be
This is a comparison of the right and left ears for correct word recall for the experimental
Both results indicate that there is no significant difference between left and right ears for word
Similarly a comparison was made of the right and left ears for correct word recall for the
control group of audio-only presentation of words, which indicated there was no significant
difference.
This is a comparison of recalled words from the right ear in the control group as compared to
the right ear in the experimental group. This indicates that there is a significant difference.
Discussion
It was found that in relation to the alternate hypothesis that there is a significant
positive difference between word recall in the right ear in the audio-visual group as compared
to the audio group experimental evidence leads us to accept this hypothesis. However in
relation to the hypothesis that there should be a significant positive difference in the right ear
versus the left ear for the audio-visual group it was found that we cannot reject the null
hypothesis. That is counter to what Broadbent suggests, that essentially no words should be
attended to in the unattended ear. It suggests a model of attention closer to that of Treisman’s
Attenuator model where all messages are attended to but given less processing. In order to
clarify and validate this statement the experiment would need modification and enhancement
to determine the level of processing given to each ear. As the experiment stands the task of
word recall makes it difficult to determine if the right ear picked up more information than the
left ear. All that can be currently said is that information was picked up in both focused and
unfocused ear. The experimental findings in relation to the control group and the final
hypothesis that there should be no significant difference between the number of correctly
recalled words in the left and right ear when pure divided attention is given can be accepted.
This lends itself to the Pertinence model where all signals are processed and passed onwards.
The experiment indicates that there is a difference in the level of recall when mixed
modality stimuli are used and further investigation should be carried out to extend this to
more comprehensive and complex tasks both in terms on complexity of audio words heard
and that of visual tasks. Also it may be of interest to switch the tasks to be carried out. There
may be benefit in determining if visual scanning and recall of a scene can be aided or
The experiment is flawed in terms of the choice of words used. Looking at Appendix
A – Word List there is a mixture of simple and complex words in use. Specifically the words
vary in the number of syllables in each. It is not clear if the complexity of the words had an
effect on the experiment results if assuming simpler words are easier to attend and recall to.
The experiment could be modified in two ways, namely reduce all words to one syllable
words or vary the complexity of words greatly to see if either has an effect.
The experiment relies on the participant remaining focused on the audio and the
visual components. There was no experiment measure setup to measure and quantify this
focused attention. The audio across different participants could have varied giving varying
results in recall. Similarly the attention paid to the screen by each participant could have
varied greatly. This could be alleviated by having all participants listen to a fixed volume
source of auditory information. Calibration of the computer system and headphones in use
gaze detection software and taken into consideration of the measure of attention paid.
Focused attention on the screen could also be improved by placing the participant into an
enclosed darkened space from which they could only see the screen and no other distractions.
The sound quality of the word samples played was poor and may have had an effect
on the accurate recall of words also. Ambient noise and visual distraction was not consistent
across experiments for each group. To counter-act this further experimentation should be
carried out to reign in any deviation from a standard experience for all participants.
As the participants were all psychology students they were aware of the goal of the
experiment and may have been biased to pay more attention to the unattended ear than
normal. The experiment should be carried out with a random sample from the general
The modalities in use could be increased to include touch, taste, smell to determine if
and how attention can be focused or divided dependent on the stimuli in use. The visual
stimulus could also be increased to not only incorporate words but images which are related
and unrelated to the words presented to investigate if the results obtained would significantly
differ.
References
Cherry, E.C. (1953). Some experiments on the recognition of speech with one and two ears.
Driver, J., & Spence, C. (1998). Attention and the crossmodal construction of space. Trends
Hampson, P.J. (1989). Aspects of attention and cognitive science. The Irish Journal of
Norman, D.A., & Shallice, T. (1986). Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of
behavior. In R.J. Davidson, G.E. Schwartz, & D. Shapiro (Eds.), The design of
Treisman, A.M. (1964). Verbal cues, language, and meaning in selective attention. American
The following are the list of words that were presented in audio form and in the order they
were played. Any word that has a bracketed visual tag was presented in visual form as well
1. Override 2. Worker
Std. Error
group Mean N Std. Deviation Mean
audio & visual Pair 1 Words recalled
from right ear 2.58 12 1.165 .336
Words recalled
from left ear 2.50 12 1.624 .469
audio only Pair 1 Words recalled
from right ear 1.50 10 1.269 .401
Words recalled
from left ear 2.60 10 1.713 .542
Std. Error
group N Mean Std. Deviation Mean
audio & visual Words recalled
from right ear 12 2.58 1.165 .336
audio only Words recalled
from right ear 10 1.50 1.269 .401
Test Value = 0
Mean 95% Confidence Interval
t df Sig. (2-tailed) Difference of the Difference
Lower Upper
Words recalled
from right ear 7.685 11 .000 2.583 1.84 3.32
Words
Words recalled recalled from
from right ear left ear
group audio & visual 1 2 2
2 2 1
3 3 3
4 3 3
5 4 2
6 3 4
7 2 4
8 1 5
9 1 2
10 2 0
11 5 0
12 3 4
Total N 12 12
audio only 1 2 6
2 3 2
3 2 2
4 1 4
5 1 3
6 0 1
7 4 4
8 0 0
9 1 2
10 1 2
Total N 10 10
Total N 22 22