Attentional Blink
Attentional Blink, reported by Raymond, Shapiro & Arnell (1992), is the robust finding that identifying a second target 200-500ms after a first one is strongly impaired. A hallmark of rapid serial visual processing.
Intermediate: 130 ms per letter.
Letters are shown one at a time at the center. (1) Remember the one DIGIT (T1) embedded in the stream. (2) Note whether an X (T2) also appeared. After the stream, enter the digit then answer whether you saw X.
History
No training records yet
References: Raymond, Shapiro & Arnell (1992); Chun & Potter (1995); Dux & Marois (2009).
Attentional Blink · scientific basis
The attentional blink was first reported by Raymond, Shapiro & Arnell (1992) in JEP:HPP. Chun & Potter (1995) proposed the canonical two-stage model.
Expert-mode parameters
These are the standard parameters from the canonical paradigm (used by the "Expert" difficulty).
| Parameter | Standard value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| RSVP rate | ~100 ms / item (~10 items/s) | Raymond 1992 |
| Stream length | 15-20 distractor letters | Raymond 1992 |
| T1 | Digit embedded among letters | Variant |
| T2 | Letter X (or other preset probe) | Raymond 1992 |
| Lag | 1-8 (T2 appears 100-800 ms after T1) | Raymond 1992 |
Healthy-population norms (by age)
Primary outcomes are Lag-3 T2|T1 accuracy and blink depth (Lag-7 − Lag-3, in percentage points). T1 Excellent = T1 mean + 1 SD (capped at 99%). Adult data from Raymond 1992, Shapiro 1997 experimental samples and Martens 2011 ageing work. Assessment mode matches the band to your actual age.
| Age band | T1 acc Excellent | Lag3 acc Mean | Blink depth Mean (pp) | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8-9 | ~90% | ~50% | ~25 | weak (interpolated) |
| 10-11 | ~92% | ~55% | ~28 | weak (interpolated) |
| 12-13 | ~94% | ~58% | ~28 | weak (interpolated) |
| 14-15 | ~96% | ~60% | ~28 | weak (interpolated) |
| 16-17 | ~97% | ~62% | ~28 | weak (interpolated) |
| 18-24 | ~99% | ~60% | ~30 | moderate |
| 25-34 | ~99% | ~60% | ~30 | moderate |
| 35-44 | ~99% | ~58% | ~30 | moderate |
| 45-54 | ~98% | ~53% | ~32 | weak (interpolated) |
| 55-64 | ~97% | ~48% | ~35 | weak (interpolated) |
| 65+ | ~96% | ~42% | ~40 | weak (extrapolated) |
Standard output metrics
- ·T1 accuracy — T1 identification (basic attention)
- ·T2|T1 by lag — Conditional accuracy across lags
- ·Blink depth — Lag-7 − Lag-3 (primary)
- ·Lag-1 sparing — Lag-1 − Lag-3
Citations
- Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., & Arnell, K. M. (1992). Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: an attentional blink? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 18(3), 849-860. DOI
- Chun, M. M., & Potter, M. C. (1995). A two-stage model for multiple target detection in RSVP. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 21(1), 109-127. DOI
- Dux, P. E., & Marois, R. (2009). The attentional blink: a review of data and theory. Atten Percept Psychophys, 71(8), 1683-1700. DOI
- Shapiro, K. L., Raymond, J. E., & Arnell, K. M. (1997). The attentional blink. Trends Cogn Sci, 1(8), 291-296. DOI
All reference ranges come from published peer-reviewed literature. For personal training reference only — not a medical diagnosis. Full methodology: docs/PARADIGMS.md.
This tool is for educational and entertainment purposes only and does not constitute medical advice or a clinical diagnosis.