Literature DB >> 27896707

Detection costs and contingent attentional capture.

Josef G Schönhammer1, Dirk Kerzel2.   

Abstract

Peripheral cues reduce reaction times (RTs) to targets at the cued location with short cue-target SOAs (cueing benefits) but increase RTs at long SOAs (cueing costs or inhibition of return). In detection tasks, cueing costs occur at shorter SOAs and are larger compared with identification tasks. To account for effects of task, detection cost theory claims that the integration of cue and target into an object file makes it more difficult to detect the target as a new event, which is the principal task-requirement in detection tasks. The integration of cue and target is expected to increase when cue and target are similar. We provided evidence for detection cost theory in the modified spatial cueing paradigm. Two types of cues (onset, color) were paired with two types of targets (onset, color) in separate blocks of trials. In the identification task, we found cueing benefits with matching (i.e., similar) cue-target pairs (onset-onset, color-color) and no cueing effects with nonmatching cue-target pairs (onset-color, color-onset), which replicates previous work. In the detection task, cueing effects with matching cues were reduced and even turned into cueing costs for onset cues with onset targets, suggesting that cue-target integration made it more difficult to detect targets at the cued location as new events. In contrast, the results for nonmatching cue-target pairs were not affected by task. Furthermore, the pattern of false alarms in the detection task provides a measure of similarity that may explain the size of cueing benefits and costs.

Keywords:  Attention; Contingent attentional capture; Detection cost; Task demands

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27896707     DOI: 10.3758/s13414-016-1248-7

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


  3 in total

1.  A meta-analysis of contingent-capture effects.

Authors:  Christian Büsel; Martin Voracek; Ulrich Ansorge
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2018-08-31

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

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

3.  The contribution of forward masking to saccadic inhibition of return.

Authors:  David Souto; Sabine Born; Dirk Kerzel
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.199

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.