Alexandra G Mitchell, Aimal Ahmad Khan, Helen Stocks, Robert D McIntosh
{"title":"Beyond bias: A registered examination of the validity of using line bisection to measure non-lateralised attention.","authors":"Alexandra G Mitchell, Aimal Ahmad Khan, Helen Stocks, Robert D McIntosh","doi":"10.1177/17470218241254761","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Line bisection is a task widely used to assess lateral asymmetries of attention, in which participants are asked to mark the midpoint of a horizontal line. The directional bisection error (DBE) from the objective midpoint of the line is the traditional measure of performance. However, an alternative method of studying the bisection behaviour, the endpoint weightings method, has been proposed. This method produces two measures of performance: endpoint weightings bias (EWB) and endpoint weightings sum (EWS). While EWB measures attentional asymmetry, it has been suggested that EWS quantifies the total (non-lateralised) attention allocated to the task. If EWS provides a valid index of non-lateralised attention, then changes in tonic and phasic arousal should systematically affect EWS. In this article, we formally tested this prediction, using time on task to manipulate tonic arousal and unpredictable auditory tones, presented simultaneously with line stimuli, to manipulate phasic arousal. Our registered analyses revealed that neither of our manipulations for tonic or phasic arousal significantly influenced EWS. Therefore, the null hypotheses cannot be rejected. An exploratory analysis of all trials and conditions revealed a significant reduction in EWS with time spent on task. However, the lack of any significant effect of the alerting tone on EWS suggests that EWS may not be a valid measure of generalised attention to the task.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218241254761","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Line bisection is a task widely used to assess lateral asymmetries of attention, in which participants are asked to mark the midpoint of a horizontal line. The directional bisection error (DBE) from the objective midpoint of the line is the traditional measure of performance. However, an alternative method of studying the bisection behaviour, the endpoint weightings method, has been proposed. This method produces two measures of performance: endpoint weightings bias (EWB) and endpoint weightings sum (EWS). While EWB measures attentional asymmetry, it has been suggested that EWS quantifies the total (non-lateralised) attention allocated to the task. If EWS provides a valid index of non-lateralised attention, then changes in tonic and phasic arousal should systematically affect EWS. In this article, we formally tested this prediction, using time on task to manipulate tonic arousal and unpredictable auditory tones, presented simultaneously with line stimuli, to manipulate phasic arousal. Our registered analyses revealed that neither of our manipulations for tonic or phasic arousal significantly influenced EWS. Therefore, the null hypotheses cannot be rejected. An exploratory analysis of all trials and conditions revealed a significant reduction in EWS with time spent on task. However, the lack of any significant effect of the alerting tone on EWS suggests that EWS may not be a valid measure of generalised attention to the task.
期刊介绍:
Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling.
QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form.
The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.