Whereof one cannot speak: How language and capture of visual attention interact

Font Matters: Deciphering the Impact of Font Types on Attention and Working Memory

Introduction Various types of fonts such as serif, sans serif, and script are used during writing and reading, which can affect the reader's attention and working memory, though there is only a subtle difference at the end of the letter. The study aimed to see the effect of font type on working memory and attention. Methods The study included healthy male adults between 18 and 40 years of age. After taking all the necessary precautions, a letter cancellation test and 2-back task in serif, sans serif, and script font types were done to evaluate subjects' attention and working memory. Results A total of 30 subjects participated in the study. The letter cancellation task (LCT) was statistically significant (P<0.05) between the three groups, where the time taken to complete the task was the shortest for serif fonts, indicating heightened attention to serif fonts. However, the accuracy of the N-back test did not show statistically significant differences (P>0.05) among the three font groups, indicating no significant change in working memory. Conclusion The type of font used can impact the reader's attention, with Times New Roman font demonstrating greater attention, particularly in the context of the letter cancellation task.

Contingent capture by color is sensitive to categorical color perception

Contingent capture (CC) theory postulates that attention can only be captured by top-down matching stimuli. Although the contingent capture of attention is a well-known and thoroughly studied phenomenon, there is still no consensus on the characteristics of the top-down template which guides the search for colors. We tried to replicate the classical contingent capture effect on color (Experiment 1) and then added linguistic processing to this perceptual effect (Experiment 2). In Experiment 1, attention was indeed captured by the cues of the same color as the target, while the cues of different colors were successfully ignored. In Experiment 2, the cue color was never identical to the target color but would either belong to the same linguistic category or not (i.e., linguistic matching and linguistic nonmatching cues). In both cases, cues were made to be equally perceptually distant from the target. Although, attention was captured by both cue types, the degree of capture was significantly higher for linguistic matching cues. Our research replicated the classic contingent capture effect but on color, and also demonstrated the effect of color categories in the search task. In short, we demonstrated the effect of color categories in the search task. Results show that the template for color search contains physical characteristics of color, as well as information about color category names.

Linguistic Skill and Stimulus-Driven Attention: A Case for Linguistic Relativity

How does the language we speak affect our perception? Here, we argue for linguistic relativity and present an explanation through "language-induced automatized stimulus-driven attention" (LASA): Our respective mother tongue automatically influences our attention and, hence, perception, and in this sense determines what we see. As LASA is highly practiced throughout life, it is difficult to suppress, and even shows in language-independent non-linguistic tasks. We argue that attention is involved in language-dependent processing and point out that automatic or stimulus-driven forms of attention, albeit initially learned as serving a linguistic skill, account for linguistic relativity as they are automatized and generalize to non-linguistic tasks. In support of this possibility, we review evidence for such automatized stimulus-driven attention in language-independent non-linguistic tasks. We conclude that linguistic relativity is possible and in fact a reality, although it might not be as powerful as assumed by some of its strongest proponents.

Procedural Control Versus Resources as Potential Origins of Human Hyper Selectivity

In the current review, we argue that experimental results usually interpreted as evidence for cognitive resource limitations could also reflect functional necessities of human information processing. First, we point out that selective processing of only specific features, objects, or locations at each moment in time allows humans to monitor the success and failure of their own overt actions and covert cognitive procedures. We then proceed to show how certain instances of selectivity are at odds with commonly assumed resource limitations. Next, we discuss examples of seemingly automatic, resource-free processing that challenge the resource view but can be easily understood from the functional perspective of monitoring cognitive procedures. Finally, we suggest that neurophysiological data supporting resource limitations might actually reflect mechanisms of how procedural control is implemented in the brain.