Literature DB >> 12852934

Visual marking inhibits singleton capture.

Christian N L Olivers1, Glyn W Humphreys.   

Abstract

This paper is concerned with how we prioritize the selection of new objects in visual scenes. We present four experiments investigating the effects of distractor previews on visual search through new objects. Participants viewed a set of to-be-ignored nontargets, with the task being to search for a target in a second set, added to the first after 1000ms. This second set could contain a salient feature singleton, defined in terms of its color, orientation, or both color and orientation. When the singleton was a distractor, search was slowed relative to when there was no singleton. Search was facilitated when the singleton was a target. Interestingly, both the interference and facilitation effects were modulated when the preview shared features with the singleton. Follow-up experiments showed that this reduction of singleton effects was not due to: (i) low-level sensory aspects of the displays, (ii) increased heterogeneity in the search set in the preview condition, or (iii) color-based grouping of old and new items. Instead, we suggest that there is an inhibitory carry-over from the first to the second set of items based on feature similarity. We suggest the suppression stems from a process termed visual marking, which suppresses irrelevant visual objects in anticipation of more relevant new objects (Watson & Humphreys, 1997). The findings argue against alternative explanations such as the automatic capture by abrupt new onsets account.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12852934     DOI: 10.1016/s0010-0285(03)00003-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Psychol        ISSN: 0010-0285            Impact factor:   3.468


  8 in total

1.  Prioritizing new over old: an fMRI study of the preview search task.

Authors:  Christian N L Olivers; Stephen Smith; Paul Matthews; Glyn W Humphreys
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  Spreading suppression and the guidance of search by movement: evidence from negative color carry-over effects.

Authors:  Kevin Dent; Glyn W Humphreys; Jason J Braithwaite
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2011-08

3.  Templates for rejection: configuring attention to ignore task-irrelevant features.

Authors:  Jason T Arita; Nancy B Carlisle; Geoffrey F Woodman
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2012-04-02       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Do the contents of visual working memory automatically influence attentional selection during visual search?

Authors:  Geoffrey F Woodman; Steven J Luck
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Cortical Mechanisms of Prioritizing Selection for Rejection in Visual Search.

Authors:  Sarah E Donohue; Mandy V Bartsch; Hans-Jochen Heinze; Mircea A Schoenfeld; Jens-Max Hopf
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-04-24       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Parallel distractor rejection as a binding mechanism in search.

Authors:  Kevin Dent; Harriet A Allen; Jason J Braithwaite; Glyn W Humphreys
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-08-09

7.  Subset selective search on the basis of color and preview.

Authors:  Mieke Donk
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 8.  Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention.

Authors:  Michel Failing; Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-04
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.