Literature DB >> 14710958

Prioritizing selection of new elements: bottom-up versus top-down control.

Mieke Donk1, Jan Theeuwes.   

Abstract

Watson and Humphreys (1997) have proposed that prioritized selection of new over old elements occurs because observers can apply top-down inhibition to the locations of the old elements by a mechanism they refer to as visual marking. However, recent evidence has suggested that the top-down mechanism is questionable (Donk & Theeuwes, 2001). In the present study, we investigated whether prioritized selection of new over old elements occurs in a bottom-up or a top-down fashion. Observers were presented with displays containing one set of elements (old elements) followed, after a certain time interval, by a second set of elements (new elements). The observers were instructed to search for the presence of a target that was presented with equal probability among the old and the new elements (Experiments 1 and 2) or twice as often among the old elements than among the new elements (Experiment 3). The results show that new elements were prioritized for selection over old ones even though the observers had no incentive to do so. The results suggest that prioritized selection of new over old elements is not mediated by a top-down inhibition process, as was proposed by Watson and Humphreys (1997). Instead, prioritization of new elements appears to be a bottom-up process. The implications of these results are discussed in terms of models of attentional control.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14710958     DOI: 10.3758/bf03194848

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 0031-5117


  10 in total

1.  Prioritizing new elements with a brief preview period: evidence against visual marking.

Authors:  Mieke Donk; Roel C Verburg
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-04

2.  The control of visual attention and its influence on prioritized processing in a location negative priming paradigm.

Authors:  Rico Fischer; Herbert Hagendorf
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2005-09-07

3.  Prioritization by transients in visual search.

Authors:  Artem V Belopolsky; Jan Theeuwes; Arthur F Kramer
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2005-02

4.  Eye movements and time-based selection: where do the eyes go in preview search?

Authors:  Derrick G Watson; Matthew Inglis
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-10

5.  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

Review 6.  Guided Search 6.0: An updated model of visual search.

Authors:  Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2021-02-05

7.  Attention capture by abrupt onsets: re-visiting the priority tag model.

Authors:  Meera M Sunny; Adrian von Mühlenen
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-12-20

8.  Attentional Capture to a Singleton Distractor Degrades Visual Marking in Visual Search.

Authors:  Kenji Yamauchi; Takayuki Osugi; Ikuya Murakami
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-05-16

9.  Perceptual grouping constrains inhibition in time-based visual selection.

Authors:  Zorana Zupan; Derrick G Watson
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 2.199

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

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

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.