Literature DB >> 17683227

Irrelevant singletons in pop-out search: attentional capture or filtering costs?

Stefanie I Becker1.   

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to investigate whether costs invoked by the presence of an irrelevant singleton distractor in a visual search task are due to attentional capture by the irrelevant singleton or spatially unrelated filtering costs. Measures of spatial effects were based on distance effects, compatibility effects, and differences between singleton and nonsingleton target trials. The results show that the distractor only regularly captures attention when it is nonpredictive of the target position and unpredictably changes its features. When the distractor is antipredictive of the target position and the irrelevant features of target and distractor remain constant throughout the experiment, spatially unrelated filtering costs prevail. Further experiments showed that filtering costs accrue from distractor inhibition or target activation processes, which in turn can be modeled as instances of priming of pop-out. The present study thus clarifies the notion of filtering costs and modifies present accounts of the distraction effect. Moreover, the results also relate to research of intertrial priming by showing that priming affects the stage of attentional selection and depends on top-down attentional control settings. (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17683227     DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.33.4.764

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  19 in total

1.  Contingent capture in cueing: the role of color search templates and cue-target color relations.

Authors:  Ulrich Ansorge; Stefanie I Becker
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2013-06-27

2.  Spatially Guided Distractor Suppression during Visual Search.

Authors:  Tobias Feldmann-Wüstefeld; Marina Weinberger; Edward Awh
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2021-03-02       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Nonspecific competition underlies transient attention.

Authors:  Anna Wilschut; Jan Theeuwes; Christian N L Olivers
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2014-09-04

4.  Top-down knowledge modulates onset capture in a feedforward manner.

Authors:  Stefanie I Becker; Amanda J Lewis; Jenna E Axtens
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2017-04

5.  Distinguishing among potential mechanisms of singleton suppression.

Authors:  Nicholas Gaspelin; Steven J Luck
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2017-10-16       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  The problem of latent attentional capture: Easy visual search conceals capture by task-irrelevant abrupt onsets.

Authors:  Nicholas Gaspelin; Eric Ruthruff; Mei-Ching Lien
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2016-02-08       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Time to Stop Calling it Attentional "Capture" and Embrace a Mechanistic Understanding of Attentional Priority.

Authors:  Brian A Anderson
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2021-03-02

8.  The attentional effects of single cues and color singletons on visual sensitivity.

Authors:  Alex L White; Rasmus Lunau; Marisa Carrasco
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2013-07-22       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 9.  The Role of Inhibition in Avoiding Distraction by Salient Stimuli.

Authors:  Nicholas Gaspelin; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2017-11-27       Impact factor: 20.229

10.  Evidence for second-order singleton suppression based on probabilistic expectations.

Authors:  Bo-Yeong Won; Mary Kosoyan; Joy J Geng
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 3.332

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.