Literature DB >> 26420441

Direct Evidence for Active Suppression of Salient-but-Irrelevant Sensory Inputs.

Nicholas Gaspelin1, Carly J Leonard2, Steven J Luck3.   

Abstract

Researchers have long debated whether attentional capture is purely stimulus driven or purely goal driven. In the current study, we tested a hybrid account, called the signal-suppression hypothesis, which posits that stimuli automatically produce a bottom-up salience signal, but that this signal can be suppressed via top-down control processes. To test this account, we used a new capture-probe paradigm in which participants searched for a target shape while ignoring an irrelevant color singleton. On occasional probe trials, letters were briefly presented inside the search shapes, and participants attempted to report these letters. Under conditions that promoted capture by the irrelevant singleton, accuracy was greater for the letter inside the singleton distractor than for letters inside nonsingleton distractors. However, when the conditions were changed to avoid capture by the singleton, accuracy for the letter inside the irrelevant singleton was reduced below the level observed for letters inside nonsingleton distractors, an indication of active suppression of processing at the singleton location.
© The Author(s) 2015.

Entities:  

Keywords:  attentional capture; inhibition; spatial attention; suppression; visual search

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26420441      PMCID: PMC4922750          DOI: 10.1177/0956797615597913

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Sci        ISSN: 0956-7976


  28 in total

Review 1.  Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection.

Authors:  Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2010-05-26

2.  Parallel and serial neural mechanisms for visual search in macaque area V4.

Authors:  Narcisse P Bichot; Andrew F Rossi; Robert Desimone
Journal:  Science       Date:  2005-04-22       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  LIP responses to a popout stimulus are reduced if it is overtly ignored.

Authors:  Anna E Ipata; Angela L Gee; Jacqueline Gottlieb; James W Bisley; Michael E Goldberg
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2006-07-02       Impact factor: 24.884

4.  The size of an attentional window modulates attentional capture by color singletons.

Authors:  Artem V Belopolsky; Laura Zwaan; Jan Theeuwes; Arthur F Kramer
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-10

5.  What is top-down about contingent capture?

Authors:  Artem V Belopolsky; Daniel Schreij; Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

7.  How much is an icon worth?

Authors:  G R Loftus; C A Johnson; A P Shimamura
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1985-02       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  Visual information processing from multiple displays.

Authors:  James C Johnston; Eric Ruthruff; Mei-Ching Lien
Journal:  Hum Factors       Date:  2014-08-04       Impact factor: 2.888

9.  Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture.

Authors:  W F Bacon; H E Egeth
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1994-05

10.  The speed of free will.

Authors:  Todd S Horowitz; Jeremy M Wolfe; George A Alvarez; Michael A Cohen; Yoana I Kuzmova
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2009-03-02       Impact factor: 2.143

View more
  83 in total

1.  The architecture of interaction between visual working memory and visual attention.

Authors:  Brett Bahle; Valerie M Beck; Andrew Hollingworth
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2018-04-09       Impact factor: 3.332

2.  Learning What Is Irrelevant or Relevant: Expectations Facilitate Distractor Inhibition and Target Facilitation through Distinct Neural Mechanisms.

Authors:  Dirk van Moorselaar; Heleen A Slagter
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-07-03       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  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

4.  A finer-grained search reveals no evidence of the attentional capture by to-be-ignored features.

Authors:  Hansol Rheem; Yang Seok Cho
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-04-28       Impact factor: 2.199

5.  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

6.  Attentional capture alters feature perception.

Authors:  Jiageng Chen; Andrew B Leber; Julie D Golomb
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2019-08-29       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Hidden from view: Statistical learning exposes latent attentional capture.

Authors:  Matthew D Hilchey; Jay Pratt
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2019-10

8.  Selection history is relative.

Authors:  Ming-Ray Liao; Mark K Britton; Brian A Anderson
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2020-07-11       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Can salient stimuli really be suppressed?

Authors:  Seah Chang; Howard E Egeth
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 2.199

10.  Immunity to attentional capture at ignored locations.

Authors:  Eric Ruthruff; Nicholas Gaspelin
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 2.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.