Divided Attention in American Sign Language Processing

Previous work investigating simultaneous judgments of multiple stimuli in visual tasks has revealed a range of divided attention effects. There appears to be no capacity limit for simple tasks, such as judging the color of two stimuli simultaneously relative to judging one (White et al., 2018). In contrast, there are pronounced deficits in performance when judging two words simultaneously (White et al., 2018; Campbell and White, 2022), indicating a large capacity limit. Divided attention effects for the categorization of nameable objects are intermediate; less severe than for words, but greater than for color (Popovkina et al., 2021; 2023). Here, we investigated divided attention effects for American Sign Language (ASL) for signers and non-signers to test if capacity limits for processing ASL letters are more like written words than for objects, and whether expertise with ASL influences divided attention for signs. Our participants were either fluent with ASL (signers, n=6) or had no ASL knowledge (non-signers, n=7). Participants saw two simultaneously presented ASL letters, and responded whether a probe stimulus matched the stimulus in a previously cued location. In the single-task condition, only one of two stimuli was cued as relevant; in the dual-task condition, both stimuli were cued as relevant. The difference in performance between these two conditions is the dual-task deficit, which quantifies the cost of dividing attention. The dual-task deficit was similar in signers and non-signers (11.2% ± 1.92% vs. 10.72% ± 1.70%), with no significant difference between the groups (t(11) = 0.19, p = 0.85). The magnitude of the divided attention effect for ASL letters was smaller than those for written word judgments, but similar to those for nameable object judgments. These results suggest that ASL letter processing has limited capacity, but the underlying source of that limit may be different than for written words.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Vision
Published
2024-09-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.24.10.1096
Primary Topic
Hearing Impairment and Communication
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Divided Attention in American Sign Language Processing

Jasmine F. Awad, Dina V. Popovkina, Ione Fine, Dave Young
Journal of Vision
Hearing Impairment and Communication
article

Divided Attention in American Sign Language Processing

Jasmine F. Awad, Dina V. Popovkina, Ione Fine, Dave Young
article en

Abstract

Previous work investigating simultaneous judgments of multiple stimuli in visual tasks has revealed a range of divided attention effects. There appears to be no capacity limit for simple tasks, such as judging the color of two stimuli simultaneously relative to judging one (White et al., 2018). In contrast, there are pronounced deficits in performance when judging two words simultaneously (White et al., 2018; Campbell and White, 2022), indicating a large capacity limit. Divided attention effects for the categorization of nameable objects are intermediate; less severe than for words, but greater than for color (Popovkina et al., 2021; 2023). Here, we investigated divided attention effects for American Sign Language (ASL) for signers and non-signers to test if capacity limits for processing ASL letters are more like written words than for objects, and whether expertise with ASL influences divided attention for signs. Our participants were either fluent with ASL (signers, n=6) or had no ASL knowledge (non-signers, n=7). Participants saw two simultaneously presented ASL letters, and responded whether a probe stimulus matched the stimulus in a previously cued location. In the single-task condition, only one of two stimuli was cued as relevant; in the dual-task condition, both stimuli were cued as relevant. The difference in performance between these two conditions is the dual-task deficit, which quantifies the cost of dividing attention. The dual-task deficit was similar in signers and non-signers (11.2% ± 1.92% vs. 10.72% ± 1.70%), with no significant difference between the groups (t(11) = 0.19, p = 0.85). The magnitude of the divided attention effect for ASL letters was smaller than those for written word judgments, but similar to those for nameable object judgments. These results suggest that ASL letter processing has limited capacity, but the underlying source of that limit may be different than for written words.

Journal of VisionVol. 24(10)
University of Washington (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 79%
Hearing Impairment and Communication
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Divided Attention in American Sign Language Processing — Jasmine F. Awad, Dina V. Popovkina, et al. · Journal of Vision (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS