Volume 15 - Articles-1404                   MEJDS (2025) 15: 21 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Kheirkhah M T, Mokhtari S, Bakouie F, Gharibzadeh S, Ashayeri H. Perceptual Load Theory and Implications in Psychopathology and Other Areas: A Review of Literature. MEJDS 2025; 15 (0) :21-21
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-3246-en.html
1- PhD Student of Cognitive Psychology, Institute for Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
2- Assistant Professor, Institute for Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
3- Associate Professor, Institute for Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
4- Professor, School of Rehabilitation Science, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract:   (618 Views)

Abstract
Background & Objectives: In a long‌–standing controversy over the source of attentional processing, some believe that information is processed based on physical properties immediately after reaching the sensory modalities (early selection), while others believe that information is not processed at the initial stages, but only after reaching higher levels of information processing, depending on whether or not it is related to the person’s goals, expectations, and background (late selection). To establish a synthesis of these two approaches, the perceptual load theory considers environmental demands or task difficulty to be the determining factor of early or late attentional selection. Accordingly, if the perceptual load of the environment is high, the selection of attention will be early; otherwise, it will be late. Criticisms and concerns, along with the vast body of empirical evidence supporting the perceptual load effect, have led to the acceptance of a weaker form of this effect, in which the perceptual load is not considered the only determining factor of attentional control but one of the determining factors. The present study reviewed conceptual and operational definitions of perceptual load, related concerns, and alternative explanations. Also, its applications in clinical fields and daily life were reviewed.
Methods: Considering that the present review focused on theoretical and practical aspects of the theory, the search for documents in the research literature was conducted on both review/theoretical and research documents. To obtain these documents, a non‌–systematic search was performed in databases, including ScienceDirect, PubMed, and PsycINFO, using related keywords such as “perceptual load,” “attentional control,” “selective attention,” “task difficulty,” “psychopathology,” “addiction,” “pain,” “nutrition,” and “daily life.” Finally, the most important documents were extracted, including review articles, theoretical articles, research methods, and research articles. Review and theoretical documents were used to address conceptual and methodological concerns, as well as alternative explanations for the theory, and research documents were used to identify the practical implications of the perceptual load theory in areas such as psychopathology, pain perception, addictive behaviors, and other areas. The search was conducted among the indexed documents between 2000 and 2023.
Results: It was found that perceptual load can be manipulated in three general ways: changing the number of items on display, the degree of similarity between target and non‌–target stimuli, and the number and complexity of perceptual operators. It was also found that regarding the strong form of the theory, there are concerns, such as confusing attention inefficiency with late attention, the absence of a clear conceptual definition of perceptual load, and the impossibility of increasing the perceptual load without increasing the cognitive load. Meanwhile, hypotheses that compete with the strong form of the theory, such as the salience hypothesis and the dilution hypothesis, were also extracted. Finally, the practical implications of the perceptual load theory in areas such as psychopathology and daily life were identified by reviewing empirical evidence.
Conclusion: A review of the research literature indicated a broad theoretical contribution of perceptual load to various clinical fields and daily life. However, the strong form of the theory cannot be considered free of conceptual and methodological flaws. The present study suggests that while the theory of perceptual load effectively identifies the underlying mechanisms related to attentional selection and investigates attention in practice, it is necessary to use it in a weaker form, taking into account existing concerns and competing hypotheses.

Full-Text [PDF 298 kb]   (47 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Review Article | Subject: Psychology

References
1. Wu W. What is conscious attention? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 2011;82(1):93–120. [DOI]
2. Desimone R, Duncan J. Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annu Rev Neurosci. 1995;18:193–222. [DOI]
3. Pinto Y, van der Leij AR, Sligte IG, Lamme VAF, Scholte HS. Bottom–up and top–down attention are independent. J Vis. 2013;13(3):16. [DOI]
4. Sani I, Stemmann H, Caron B, Bullock D, Stemmler T, Fahle M, et al. The human endogenous attentional control network includes a ventro–temporal cortical node. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):360. [DOI]
5. Theeuwes J. Exogenous and endogenous control of attention: the effect of visual onsets and offsets. Percept Psychophys. 1991;49(1):83–90. [DOI]
6. Tang X, Wu J, Shen Y. The interactions of multisensory integration with endogenous and exogenous attention. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2016;61:208–24. [DOI]
7. Broadbent DE. Perception and communication. Elmsford, NY, US: Pergamon Press; 1958. [DOI]
8. Deutsch JA, Deutsch D. Attention: Some theoretical considerations. Psychological Review. 1963;70(1):80–90. [DOI]
9. Yantis S, Johnston JC. On the locus of visual selection: evidence from focused attention tasks. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1990;16(1):135–49. [DOI]
10. Lavie N. Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1995;21(3):451–68. [DOI]
11. Lavie N, Hirst A, de Fockert JW, Viding E. Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2004;133(3):339–54. [DOI]
12. Remington A, Cartwright–Finch U, Lavie N. I can see clearly now: the effects of age and perceptual load on inattentional blindness. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014;8:229. [DOI]
13. Soares SC, Rocha M, Neiva T, Rodrigues P, Silva CF. Social anxiety under load: the effects of perceptual load in processing emotional faces. Front Psychol. 2015;6:479. [DOI]
14. Murphy G, Greene CM. Perceptual load induces inattentional blindness in drivers. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2016;30(3):479–83. [DOI]
15. Romero YR, Straube T, Nitsch A, Miltner WHR, Weiss T. Interaction between stimulus intensity and perceptual load in the attentional control of pain. Pain. 2013;154(1):135–40. [DOI]
16. Morris J, Keith Ngai MY, Yeomans MR, Forster S. A high perceptual load task reduces thoughts about chocolate, even while hungry. Appetite. 2020;151:104694. [DOI]
17. Morris J, Vi CT, Obrist M, Forster S, Yeomans MR. Ingested but not perceived: response to satiety cues disrupted by perceptual load. Appetite. 2020;155:104813. [DOI]
18. Johnson DN, McGrath A, McNeil C. Cuing interacts with perceptual load in visual search. Psychol Sci. 2002;13(3):284–7. [DOI]
19. Benoni H, Tsal Y. Where have we gone wrong? Perceptual load does not affect selective attention. Vision Research. 2010;50(13):1292–8. [DOI]
20. Eltiti S, Wallace D, Fox E. Selective target processing: perceptual load or distractor salience? Percept Psychophys. 2005;67(5):876–85. [DOI]
21. Macdonald JSP, Lavie N. Visual perceptual load induces inattentional deafness. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2011;73(6):1780–9. [DOI]
22. Lavie N. Distracted and confused?: Selective attention under load. Trends Cogn Sci. 2005;9(2):75–82. [DOI]
23. Cartwright-Finch U, Lavie N. The role of perceptual load in inattentional blindness. Cognition. 2007;102(3):321–40. [DOI]
24. Lavie N. Selective attention and cognitive control: dissociating attentional functions through different types of load. In: Monsell S, Driver J. Control of cognitive processes: attention and performance XVIII. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2000. pp: 175–194. [DOI]
25. Gupta R, Hur YJ, Lavie N. Distracted by pleasure: effects of positive versus negative valence on emotional capture under load. Emotion. 2016;16(3):328–37. [DOI]
26. Forster S, Lavie N. High perceptual load makes everybody equal: eliminating individual differences in distractibility with load. Psychological Science. 2007;18(5):377–81. [DOI]
27. Chen Z, Cave KR. Perceptual load vs. dilution: the roles of attentional focus, stimulus category, and target predictability. Front Psychol. 2013;4:327. [DOI]
28. Cave KR, Chen Z. Identifying visual targets amongst interfering distractors: sorting out the roles of perceptual load, dilution, and attentional zoom. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2016;78(7):1822–38. [DOI]
29. Murphy S, Spence C, Dalton P. Auditory perceptual load: a review. Hear Res. 2017;352:40–8. [DOI]
30. Eriksen BA, Eriksen CW. Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics. 1974;16(1):143–9. [DOI]
31. Roper ZJJ, Cosman JD, Vecera SP. Perceptual load corresponds with factors known to influence visual search. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2013;39(5):1340–51. [DOI]
32. Forster S, Lavie N. Failures to ignore entirely irrelevant distractors: the role of load. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2008;14(1):73–83. [DOI]
33. Fairnie J, Moore BCJ, Remington A. Missing a trick: auditory load modulates conscious awareness in audition. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2016;42(7):930–8. [DOI]
34. Murphy S, Fraenkel N, Dalton P. Perceptual load does not modulate auditory distractor processing. Cognition. 2013;129(2):345–55. [DOI]
35. Alain C, Izenberg A. Effects of attentional load on auditory scene analysis. J Cogn Neurosci. 2003;15(7):1063–73. [DOI]
36. Benoni H, Tsal Y. Conceptual and methodological concerns in the theory of perceptual load. Front Psychol. 2013;4:522. [DOI]
37. Tsal Y, Benoni H. Diluting the burden of load: perceptual load effects are simply dilution effects. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2010;36(6):1645–56. [DOI]
38. Grave J, Soares SC, Morais S, Rodrigues P, Madeira N. The effects of perceptual load in processing emotional facial expression in psychotic disorders. Psychiatry Res. 2017;250:121–8. [DOI]
39. Öhman A, Soares SC, Juth P, Lindström B, Esteves F. Evolutionary derived modulations of attention to two common fear stimuli: serpents and hostile humans. Journal of Cognitive Psychology. 2012;24(1):17–32. [DOI]
40. Fox E, Yates A, Ashwin C. Trait anxiety and perceptual load as determinants of emotion processing in a fear conditioning paradigm. Emotion. 2012;12(2):236–49. [DOI]
41. Yates A, Ashwin C, Fox E. Does emotion processing require attention? the effects of fear conditioning and perceptual load. Emotion. 2010;10(6):822–30. [DOI]
42. Pessoa L, Padmala S, Morland T. Fate of unattended fearful faces in the amygdala is determined by both attentional resources and cognitive modulation. Neuroimage. 2005;28(1):249–55. [DOI]
43. Pessoa L, Kastner S, Ungerleider LG. Attentional control of the processing of neural and emotional stimuli. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2002;15(1):31–45. [DOI]
44. Pessoa L, McKenna M, Gutierrez E, Ungerleider LG. Neural processing of emotional faces requires attention. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002;99(17):11458–63. [DOI]
45. Eysenck MW, Derakshan N, Santos R, Calvo MG. Anxiety and cognitive performance: attentional control theory. Emotion. 2007;7(2):336–53. [DOI]
46. Bishop SJ. Trait anxiety and impoverished prefrontal control of attention. Nat Neurosci. 2009;12(1):92–8. [DOI]
47. Sadeh N, Bredemeier K. Individual differences at high perceptual load: the relation between trait anxiety and selective attention. Cogn Emot. 2011;25(4):747–55. [DOI]
48. Remington A, Swettenham J, Campbell R, Coleman M. Selective attention and perceptual load in autism spectrum disorder. Psychol Sci. 2009;20(11):1388–93. [DOI]
49. Bayliss AP, Kritikos A. Brief report: perceptual load and the Autism Spectrum in typically developed individuals. J Autism Dev Disord. 2011;41(11):1573–8. [DOI]
50. Tillmann J, Tuomainen J, Swettenham J. The effect of visual perceptual load on auditory awareness of social vs. non-social stimuli in individuals with Autism. J Autism Dev Disord. 2021;51(4):1028–38. [DOI]
51. Carreiro LR, Machado-Pinheiro W, Junior AA. Adults with ADHD symptoms express a better inhibitory capacity when the perceptual load is higher. Eur Psychiatry. 2021;64(Suppl 1):S613. [DOI]
52. Murphy S, Dalton P. Out of touch? Visual load induces inattentional numbness. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2016;42(6):761–5. [DOI]
53. Kazemitabar M, Kheirkhah MT, Mokarrami M, Garcia D. Does auditory attentional bias determine craving for methamphetamine? A pilot study using a word recognition dichotic listening task. Heliyon. 2022;8(11):e11311. [DOI]
54. Schulte T, Mueller–Oehring EM, Rosenbloom MJ, Pfefferbaum A, Sullivan EV. Differential effect of HIV infection and alcoholism on conflict processing, attentional allocation, and perceptual load: evidence from a stroop match–to–sample task. Biol Psychiatry. 2005;57(1):67–75. [DOI]
55. Yan X, Jiang Y, Wang J, Deng Y, He S, Weng X. Preconscious attentional bias in cigarette smokers: a probe into awareness modulation on attentional bias. Addict Biol. 2009;14(4):478–88. [DOI]
56. Braude L, Stevenson RJ. Watching television while eating increases energy intake. Examining the mechanisms in female participants. Appetite. 2014;76:9–16. [DOI]
57. Marciano H, Yeshurun Y. Perceptual load in different regions of the visual scene and its relevance for driving. Hum Factors. 2015;57(4):701–16. [DOI]
58. Marciano H, Yeshurun Y. Perceptual load in central and peripheral regions and its effects on driving performance: advertizing billboards. Work. 2012;41(Suppl 1):3181–8. [DOI]
59. Redenbo SJ, Lee YC. Effects of cognitive and perceptual loads on driver behavior. Transp Res Rec. 2009;2138(1):20–7. [DOI]
60. Morin C. Neuromarketing: the new science of consumer behavior. Soc. 2011;48(2):131–5. [DOI]
61. Knoeferle KM, Knoeferle P, Velasco C, Spence C. Multisensory brand search: how the meaning of sounds guides consumers’ visual attention. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2016;22(2):196–210. [DOI]
62. Leung XY, Lyu J, Bai B. A fad or the future? Examining the effectiveness of virtual reality advertising in the hotel industry. Int J Hosp Manag. 2020;88:102391. [DOI]
63. Murphy G, Greene CM. Perceptual load affects eyewitness accuracy and susceptibility to leading questions. Front Psychol. 2016;7:1322. [DOI]
64. Laney C, Loftus E. Eyewitness testimony and memory biases. In: Biswas–Diener R, Diener E. Introduction to psychology: the full Noba collection [Internet]. Champaign, IL: DEF publishers; 2016 [cited Nov 2024]. Available from: [Article]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2025 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Middle Eastern Journal of Disability Studies

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb