Literature DB >> 34766817

Attentional suppression of highly salient color singletons.

Brad T Stilwell1, Nicholas Gaspelin1.   

Abstract

A longstanding debate in visual attention research has been whether physically salient objects have an automatic power to capture attention. Recent evidence has supported a hybrid model. According to the signal suppression hypothesis, salient items automatically attract attention but can be proactively suppressed via top-down control to prevent attentional capture. Although much recent evidence has suggested that salient items can be suppressed, many of these studies used color singletons with relatively low salience. It is therefore unknown whether highly salient color singletons can also be suppressed. The current study adapted the probe technique to assess capture by color singletons at large set sizes (10 or 30 items). In four experiments, we observed no evidence that highly salient color singletons captured attention and instead observed evidence that they were suppressed below baseline levels of processing. We did, however, find strong evidence of floor effects in probe report at high set sizes, which can be mitigated by limiting the number of items that are simultaneously probed. Altogether, the results support the signal suppression hypothesis. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34766817     DOI: 10.1037/xhp0000948

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


  7 in total

1.  Do salient abrupt onsets trigger suppression?

Authors:  Emily Burgess; Christopher Hauck; Emile De Pooter; Eric Ruthruff; Mei-Ching Lien
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-10-07       Impact factor: 2.157

2.  Search mode, not the attentional window, determines the magnitude of attentional capture.

Authors:  Dirk Kerzel; Stanislas Huynh Cong
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-10-07       Impact factor: 2.157

3.  Does attentional suppression occur at the level of perception or decision-making? Evidence from Gaspelin et al.'s (2015) probe letter task.

Authors:  Dirk Kerzel; Olivier Renaud
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2022-09-12

4.  Learned distractor rejection persists across target search in a different dimension.

Authors:  Brad T Stilwell; Shaun P Vecera
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-08-31       Impact factor: 2.157

5.  Testing the underlying processes leading to learned distractor rejection: Learned oculomotor avoidance.

Authors:  Brad T Stilwell; Shaun P Vecera
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-04-06       Impact factor: 2.157

6.  Progress and Remaining Issues: A Response to the Commentaries on.

Authors:  Nicholas Gaspelin; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2021-09-24

Review 7.  Ten simple rules to study distractor suppression.

Authors:  Malte Wöstmann; Viola S Störmer; Jonas Obleser; Douglas A Addleman; Søren K Andersen; Nicholas Gaspelin; Joy J Geng; Steven J Luck; MaryAnn P Noonan; Heleen A Slagter; Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  Prog Neurobiol       Date:  2022-04-12       Impact factor: 10.885

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.