Literature DB >> 26191616

Evidence for negative feature guidance in visual search is explained by spatial recoding.

Valerie M Beck1, Andrew Hollingworth1.   

Abstract

Theories of attention and visual search explain how attention is guided toward objects with known target features. But can attention be directed away from objects with a feature known to be associated only with distractors? Most studies have found that the demand to maintain the to-be-avoided feature in visual working memory biases attention toward matching objects rather than away from them. In contrast, Arita, Carlisle, and Woodman (2012) claimed that attention can be configured to selectively avoid objects that match a cued distractor color, and they reported evidence that this type of negative cue generates search benefits. However, the colors of the search array items in Arita et al. (2012) were segregated by hemifield (e.g., blue items on the left, red on the right), which allowed for a strategy of translating the feature-cue information into a simple spatial template (e.g., avoid right, or attend left). In the present study, we replicated the negative cue benefit using the Arita et al. (2012), method (albeit within a subset of participants who reliably used the color cues to guide attention). Then, we eliminated the benefit by using search arrays that could not be grouped by hemifield. Our results suggest that feature-guided avoidance is implemented only indirectly, in this case by translating feature-cue information into a spatial template. (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26191616      PMCID: PMC4586389          DOI: 10.1037/xhp0000109

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


  22 in total

1.  A theory of visual attention.

Authors:  C Bundesen
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 8.934

2.  Early, involuntary top-down guidance of attention from working memory.

Authors:  David Soto; Dietmar Heinke; Glyn W Humphreys; Manuel J Blanco
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  Setting up the target template in visual search.

Authors:  Timothy J Vickery; Li-Wei King; Yuhong Jiang
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2005-02-09       Impact factor: 2.240

Review 4.  Working memory as an emergent property of the mind and brain.

Authors:  B R Postle
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2005-12-01       Impact factor: 3.590

5.  Feature-based memory-driven attentional capture: visual working memory content affects visual attention.

Authors:  Christian N L Olivers; Frank Meijer; Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Cueing the location of a distractor: an inhibitory mechanism of spatial attention?

Authors:  Jaap Munneke; Stefan Van der Stigchel; Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2008-06-26

7.  Visual search and stimulus similarity.

Authors:  J Duncan; G W Humphreys
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 8.934

Review 8.  Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention.

Authors:  R Desimone; J Duncan
Journal:  Annu Rev Neurosci       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 12.449

9.  Visual working memory modulates rapid eye movements to simple onset targets.

Authors:  Andrew Hollingworth; Michi Matsukura; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2013-03-18

10.  What drives memory-driven attentional capture? The effects of memory type, display type, and search type.

Authors:  Christian N L Olivers
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.332

View more
  19 in total

1.  Gaze dynamics of feature-based distractor inhibition under prior-knowledge and expectations.

Authors:  Wen Wen; Yangming Zhang; Sheng Li
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-04-26       Impact factor: 2.199

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

3.  The guidance of attention by templates for rejection during visual search.

Authors:  Nick Berggren; Martin Eimer
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-11-18       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 4.  Inhibition as a potential resolution to the attentional capture debate.

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

5.  Optimizing perception: Attended and ignored stimuli create opposing perceptual biases.

Authors:  Mohsen Rafiei; Sabrina Hansmann-Roth; David Whitney; Árni Kristjánsson; Andrey Chetverikov
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-04       Impact factor: 2.199

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.  Flexible top-down control in the interaction between working memory and perception.

Authors:  Chunyue Teng; Jacqueline M Fulvio; Jiefeng Jiang; Bradley R Postle
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2022-10-04       Impact factor: 2.004

8.  Quantifying the Attentional Impact of Working Memory Matching Targets and Distractors.

Authors:  Nancy B Carlisle; Geoffrey F Woodman
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2019-06-27

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.  History Modulates Early Sensory Processing of Salient Distractors.

Authors:  Kirsten C S Adam; John T Serences
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2021-07-30       Impact factor: 6.709

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.