Advertisement

Psychological Research

, Volume 83, Issue 7, pp 1416–1425 | Cite as

The impact of temporal contingencies between cue and target onset on spatial attentional capture by subliminal onset cues

  • Tobias SchoeberlEmail author
  • Ulrich Ansorge
Original Article

Abstract

Prior research suggested that attentional capture by subliminal abrupt onset cues is stimulus driven. In these studies, reacting was faster when a searched-for target appeared at the location of a preceding abrupt onset cue compared to when the same target appeared at a location away from the cue (cueing effect), although the earlier onset of the cue was subliminal, because it appeared as one out of three horizontally aligned placeholders with a lead time that was too short to be noticed by the participants. Because the cueing effects seemed to be independent of top–down search settings for target features, the effect was attributed to stimulus-driven attentional capture. However, prior studies did not investigate if participants experienced the cues as useful temporal warning signals and, therefore, attended to the cues in a top–down way. Here, we tested to which extent search settings based on temporal contingencies between cue and target onset could be responsible for spatial cueing effects. Cueing effects were replicated, and we showed that removing temporal contingencies between cue and target onset did not diminish the cueing effects (Experiments 1 and 2). Neither presenting the cues in the majority of trials after target onset (Experiment 1) nor presenting cue and target unrelated to one another (Experiment 2) led to a significant reduction of the spatial cueing effects. Results thus support the hypothesis that the subliminal cues captured attention in a stimulus-driven way.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Bertelson, P. (1967). The time course of preparation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 19, 272–279.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14640746708400102.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bertelson, P., & Tisseyre, F. (1968). The time-course of preparation with regular and irregular foreperiods. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 297–300.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14640746680400165.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Burnham, B. (2007). Displaywide visual features associated with a search display’s appearance can mediate attentional capture. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 392–422.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Correa, A., Lupiáñez, J., Milliken, B., & Tudela, P. (2004). Endogenous temporal orienting of attention in detection and discrimination tasks. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 264–278.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Folk, C. L., & Remington, R. W. (2015). Unexpected abrupt onsets can override a top-down set for color. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41, 1153–1165.  https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000084.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 1030–1044.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.18.4.1030.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Fuchs, I., & Ansorge, U. (2012). Inhibition of return is no hallmark of exogenous capture by unconscious cues. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6:30, 1–8.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fuchs, I., Theeuwes, J., & Ansorge, U. (2013). Exogenous attentional capture by subliminal abrupt-onset cues: Evidence from contrast polarity independent cueing effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 974–988.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030419.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Gibson, B., & Kelsey, E. (1998). Stimulus-driven attentional capture is contingent on attentional set for displaywide visual features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 699–706.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.24.3.699.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Goller, F., Ditye, T., & Ansorge, U. (2016). The contribution of color to attention capture effects during search for onset targets. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78, 789–807.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-1053-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hayward, D., & Ristic, J. (2015). Exposing the cuing task: The case of gaze and arrow cues. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77, 1088–1104.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-0877-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Klein, R. M. (2000). Inhibition of return. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 138–147.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01452-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Laidlaw, K. E. W., & Kingstone, A. (2017). If not when, then where? Ignoring temporal information eliminates reflexive but not volitional spatial orienting. Vision, 1, 12.  https://doi.org/10.3390/vision1020012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Los, S. A., & Shut, M. L. J. (2008). The effective time course of preparation. Cognitive Psychology, 57, 20–55.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2007.11.001.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Los, S. A., & Van Den Heuvel, E. (2001). Intentional and unintentional contributions to nonspecific preparation during reaction time foreperiods. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 370–386.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.134.1.52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. McCormick, P. A. (1997). Orienting attention without awareness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 168–180.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.23.1.168.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Mulckhuyse, M., Talsma, D., & Theeuwes, J. (2007). Grabbing attention without knowing: Automatic capture of attention by subliminal spatial cues. Visual Cognition, 15, 779–788.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280701307001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Purushothaman, G., Patel, S. S., Bedell, H. E., & Ogmen, H. (1998). Moving ahead through differential visual latency. Nature, 396, 424.  https://doi.org/10.1038/24766.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Schoeberl, T., Fuchs, I., Theeuwes, J., & Ansorge, U. (2015). Stimulus-driven attentional capture by subliminal onset cues. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 77, 737–748.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-014-0802-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Theeuwes, J. (1992). Perceptual selectivity for color and form. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 599–606.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Theeuwes, J. (2010). Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychologica, 135, 77–99.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Townsend, J. T., & Ashby, F. G. (1978). Methods of modeling capacity in simple processing systems. In J. Castellan & F. Restle (Eds.), Cognitive theory (Vol. 3, pp. 200–239). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  23. Townsend, J. T., & Ashby, F. G. (1983). Stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Van der Burg, E., Olivers, C. N., Bronkhorst, H. W., & Theeuwes, J. (2009). Pip and pop: Nonspatial auditory signals improve spatial visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1053–1065.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.34.5.1053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Weinbach, N., & Henik, A. (2012). Temporal orienting and alerting: The same or different? Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 236.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00236.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Weinbach, N., Shofty, I., Gabay, S., & Henik, A. (2015). Endogenous temporal and spatial orienting: Evidence for two distinct attentional mechanisms. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 967–973.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0750-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Yantis, S., & Jonides, J. (1984). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Evidence from visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 601–620.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.10.5.601.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Basic Psychological Research and Research Methods, Faculty of PsychologyUniversity of ViennaViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations