{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020222446916076844, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012133468149646108, 'mean_word_length': 5.07361963190184, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The role of attention in subitizing: Is the magical number 1?

Subitizing, the fast and accurate enumeration of up to about 3 or 4 objects, has often been thought to be dependent on limited-capacity preattentive mechanisms. We used an attentional blink paradigm to investigate the extent to which subitizing requires attentional resources. On each trial, subjects identified a target letter in an RSVP stream and then enumerated dots presented in the stream that were either simultaneous with the target letter or followed it by up to 400 ms. For numerosities from 2 to 9, evidence of an attentional blink was observed; only enumeration of 0 or 1 elements was independent of lag. Thus, even enumeration of 2–3 objects, which is within the traditional subitizing range, appears to require attentional resources. The relation of this work to studies on the attentional requirements of detecting a unique item among distractors, a supposedly preattentive discrimination, is briefly discussed.