On finding negative priming from distractors.

Negative priming from distractors has attracted considerable interest because it appears to reveal a fundamental mechanism of selective attention. Recently, the phenomenon has become muddled because it can be explained in far too many ways. This may partly be because the empirical foundation for the phenomenon has been handicapped by an overreliance on a simplistic comparison of a single experimental condition with control. A sounder approach requires that we collect data that can rule out alternatives to the hypothesis we might favor or test. Regardless of the paradigm used, we propose collecting data from a much fuller set of conditions than is typical. Despite the variety of underlying explanations, we show that the various theories that attribute negative priming to ignoring the distractor predict a common pattern of results across the full set of related conditions. Theories, such as inhibition of return, that do not attribute the cost in performance to ignoring the distractor do not predict this pattern.