Literature DB >> 22893004

The ignoring paradox: cueing distractor features leads first to selection, then to inhibition of to-be-ignored items.

Jeff Moher1, Howard E Egeth.   

Abstract

Observers find a target item more quickly when they have foreknowledge of target-defining attributes, such as identity, color, or location. However, it is less clear whether foreknowledge of nontarget attributes can also speed search. Munneke, Van der Stigchel, and Theeuwes Acta Psychologica 129:101-107, (2008) found that observers found the target more quickly when they were cued to ignore a region of space where a target would not appear. Using a similar paradigm, we explored the effects of cueing nontarget features on search. We found that when we cued observers to ignore nontarget features, search was slowed. The results from a probe-dot detection task revealed that this slowing occurred because, paradoxically, observers initially selected an item appearing in the to-be-ignored color. Finally, we found that cueing nontarget features sped search when placeholders matching the location of the to-be-ignored color preceded presentation of the search display by at least 800 ms; thus, it appears that some limited inhibition of to-be-ignored items occurs following selection. Taken together, these results suggest that observers are unable to explicitly avoid selection of items matching known nontarget features. Instead, when nontarget features are cued, observers select the to-be-ignored feature or the locations of objects matching that feature early in search, and only inhibit them after this selection process.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22893004     DOI: 10.3758/s13414-012-0358-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.199


  41 in total

1.  Goal-directed action is automatically biased towards looming motion.

Authors:  Jeff Moher; Jonathan Sit; Joo-Hyun Song
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2014-08-24       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  Implicitly learned suppression of irrelevant spatial locations.

Authors:  Andrew B Leber; Rachael E Gwinn; Yoolim Hong; Ryan J O'Toole
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-12

Review 3.  Inhibition as a potential resolution to the attentional capture debate.

Authors:  Nicholas Gaspelin; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Curr Opin Psychol       Date:  2018-10-29

4.  On the precision of goal-directed attentional selection.

Authors:  Brian A Anderson
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2014-08-11       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Inhibition drives early feature-based attention.

Authors:  Jeff Moher; Balaji M Lakshmanan; Howard E Egeth; Joshua B Ewen
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2014-01-03

6.  Whatever you do, don't look at the...: Evaluating guidance by an exclusionary attentional template.

Authors:  Valerie M Beck; Steven J Luck; Andrew Hollingworth
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2017-10-16       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Suppression of overt attentional capture by salient-but-irrelevant color singletons.

Authors:  Nicholas Gaspelin; Carly J Leonard; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Oculomotor Inhibition of Salient Distractors: Voluntary Inhibition Cannot Override Selection History.

Authors:  Nicholas Gaspelin; John M Gaspar; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2019-04-09

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.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.