Literature DB >> 29717472

Feature integration in basic detection and localization tasks: Insights from the attentional orienting literature.

Greg Huffman1, Matthew D Hilchey2, Jay Pratt2.   

Abstract

Once presumed to be intimately related, feature integration and the consequences of attentional orienting are now often studied separately. Yet the paradigms used to study each can be highly similar; participants respond to a stimulus, which is then followed by a second stimulus, matching or mismatching the first on some feature(s). Given the similarities between the methods, it seems likely that these fields each could gain insights regarding their own work by looking at the other. Here we note a peculiarity of feature integration research: It relies on paradigms that require or encourage participants to identify the nonspatial features of a stimulus in order to make the correct response. This leaves open the question of whether feature integration effects can be found in tasks that do not require stimulus identity (e.g., color or shape) processing. To answer this question, we reviewed attentional orienting studies that manipulated whether stimulus identity repeated but that required only detection or localization responses, irrespective of stimulus identity. With one exception, feature integration effects were absent from those experiments. Furthermore, we attempted to replicate the exception and found no feature integration effects. Our review shows that detection and localization paradigms are particularly useful for studying the consequences of attentional orienting in the absence of integration effects, and that these same tasks provide a baseline to understand the sources of feature integration effects with only slightly variations in the basic task.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Perception and action; Repetition effects; Space-based attention

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29717472     DOI: 10.3758/s13414-018-1535-6

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


  4 in total

1.  Is attention really biased toward the last target location in visual search? Attention, response rules, distractors, and eye movements.

Authors:  Matthew D Hilchey; Victoria Antinucci; Dominique Lamy; Jay Pratt
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2019-04

2.  Binding of Task-Irrelevant Action Features and Auditory Action Effects.

Authors:  Sámuel Varga; Roland Pfister; Bence Neszmélyi; Wilfried Kunde; János Horváth
Journal:  J Cogn       Date:  2022-06-06

3.  Saccadic landing positions reveal that eye movements are affected by distractor-based retrieval.

Authors:  Lars-Michael Schöpper; Markus Lappe; Christian Frings
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-08-17       Impact factor: 2.157

4.  Effects of Visual Scene Complexity on Neural Signatures of Spatial Attention.

Authors:  Lia M Bonacci; Scott Bressler; Jasmine A C Kwasa; Abigail L Noyce; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2020-03-24       Impact factor: 3.169

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.