Advertisement

Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics

, Volume 80, Issue 7, pp 1718–1730 | Cite as

Multiple attentional control settings at distinct locations without the confounding of repetition priming

  • Sang A Cho
  • Yang Seok Cho
Article
  • 115 Downloads

Abstract

An attentional control setting (ACS), which is based on the task goal, induces involuntary attentional capture by a stimulus possessing a target-defining feature. It is unclear whether ACSs are maintained for multiple targets defined as conjunctions of a color and location. In the present study we examined the possibility of local ACSs for dual targets defined as combinations of color and location, using different paradigms: visual search in Experiment 1, and spatial cueing in Experiment 2. In Experiment 1, a distractor captured attention only when its features matched the ACSs. Likewise, in Experiment 2, a significant attentional capture effect was found only with a matching cue, whose color and location were in line with the conjunction of the target definition. Importantly, the identical pattern of attentional capture was also obtained for a neutral-color target, which was unlikely to be primed by any color of the cue. Thus, these findings imply that the attentional bias depending on the match between the cue and target did not result from cue–target repetition priming. The present study highlights that top-down attentional control can be set flexibly to accomplish a complex task goal efficiently.

Keywords

Attentional capture Visual search Selective attention 

References

  1. Adamo, M., Pun, C., & Ferber, S. (2010). Multiple attentional control settings influence late attentional selection but do not provide an early attentional filter. Cognitive Neuroscience, 1, 102–110.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17588921003646149 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Adamo, M., Pun, C., Pratt, J., & Ferber, S. (2008). Your divided attention, please! The maintenance of multiple attentional control sets over distinct regions in space. Cognition, 107, 295–303.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.07.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Adamo, M., Wozny, S., Pratt, J., & Ferber, S. (2010). Parallel, independent attentional control settings for colors and shapes. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 1730–1735.  https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.7.1730 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, B. A. (2015). Value-driven attentional capture is modulated by spatial context. Visual Cognition, 23, 67–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson, B. A., & Folk, C. L. (2012). Dissociating location-specific inhibition and attention shifts: Evidence against the disengagement account of contingent capture. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74, 1183–1198.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-012-0325-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Asanowicz, D., Śmigasiewicz, K., & Verleger, R. (2013). Differences between visual hemifields in identifying rapidly presented target stimuli: Letters and digits, faces, and shapes. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, A452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Awh, E., Belopolsky, A. V., & Theeuwes, J. (2012). Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: A failed theoretical dichotomy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16, 437–443.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.06.010 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Bacon, W. F., & Egeth, H. E. (1994). Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture. Perception & Psychophysics, 55, 485–496.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Becker, M. W., Ravizza, S. M., & Peltier, C. (2015). An inability to set independent attentional control settings by hemifield. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77, 2640–2652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Belopolsky, A. V., Schreij, D., & Theeuwes, J. (2010). What is top-down about contingent capture? Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 326–341.  https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.2.326 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burnham, B. R., Rozell, C. A., Kasper, A., Bianco, N. E., & Delliturri, A. (2011). The visual hemifield asymmetry in the spatial blink during singleton search and feature search. Brain and Cognition, 75, 261–272.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2011.01.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Cosman, J. D., & Vecera, S. P. (2013). Context-dependent control over attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 836–848.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Cousineau, D. (2005). Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson’s method. Tutorial in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 1, 42–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Du, F., & Abrams, R. A. (2010). Visual field asymmetry in attentional capture. Brain and Cognition, 72, 310–316.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Folk, C. L., & Anderson, B. A. (2010). Target-uncertainty effects in attentional capture: Color-singleton set or multiple attentional control settings?. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 421–426.  https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.17.3.421 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Folk, C. L., Leber, A. B., & Egeth, H. E. (2002). Made you blink! Contingent attentional capture produces a spatial blink. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 741–753.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194741 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Folk, C. L., & Remington, R. (1998). Selectivity in distraction by irrelevant featural singletons: Evidence for two forms of attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 847–858.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.24.3.847 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Folk, C. L., & Remington, R. (2006). Top-down modulation of preattentive processing: Testing the recovery account of contingent capture. Visual Cognition, 14, 445–465.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280500193545 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., & Wright, J. H. (1994). The structure of attentional control: Contingent attentional capture by apparent motion, abrupt onset, and color. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 317–329.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.20.2.317 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Grubert, A., & Eimer, M. (2016). All set, indeed! N2pc components reveal simultaneous attentional control settings for multiple target colors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42, 1215–1230.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Irons, J. L., Folk, C. L., & Remington, R. W. (2012). All set! Evidence of simultaneous attentional control settings for multiple target colors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 758–775.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Irons, J. L., & Remington, R. W. (2013). Can attentional control settings be maintained for two color–location conjunctions? Evidence from an RSVP task. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 75, 862–875.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-013-0439-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ito, M., & Kawahara, J. I. (2016). Contingent attentional capture across multiple feature dimensions in a temporal search task. Acta Psychologica, 163, 107–113.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.11.009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Klink, P. C., Jentgens, P., & Lorteije, J. A. M. (2014). Priority maps explain the roles of value, attention, and salience in goal-oriented behavior. Journal of Neuroscience, 34, 13867–13869.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Leber, A. B., & Egeth, H. E. (2006a). Attention on autopilot: Past experience and attentional set. Visual Cognition, 14, 565–583.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280500193438 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Leber, A. B., & Egeth, H. E. (2006b). It’s under control: Top-down search strategies can override attentional capture. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 132–138.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193824 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lien, M.-C., Ruthruff, E., & Johnston, J. C. (2010). Attentional capture with rapidly changing attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1–16.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015875 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Moore, K. S., & Weissman, D. H. (2010). Involuntary transfer of a top-down attentional set into the focus of attention: Evidence from a contingent attentional capture paradigm. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 1495–1509.  https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.6.1495 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Moore, K. S., & Weissman, D. H. (2011). Set-specific capture can be reduced by pre-emptively occupying a limited-capacity focus of attention. Visual Cognition, 19, 417–444.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2011.558862 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Parrott, S. E., Levinthal, B. R., & Franconeri, S. L. (2010). Complex attentional control settings. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 2297–2304. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2010.520085 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pratt, J., & Hommel, B. (2003). Symbolic control of visual attention: The role of working memory and attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 835–845. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.29.5.835 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Remington, R. W., Folk, C. L., & McLean, J. P. (2001). Contingent attentional capture or delayed allocation of attention? Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 298–307.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194470 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Roper, Z. J. J., & Vecera, S. P. (2012). Searching for two things at once: Establishment of multiple attentional control settings on a trial-by-trial basis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 1114–1121.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0297-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sha, L. Z., & Jiang, Y. V. (2016). Components of reward-driven attentional capture. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78, 403–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Śmigasiewicz, K., Asanowicz, D., Westphal, N., & Verleger, R. (2015). Bias for the left visual field in rapid serial visual presentation: Effects of additional salient cues suggest a critical role of attention. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 27, 266–279.  https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00714 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Śmigasiewicz, K., Westphal, N., & Verleger, R. (2017). Leftward bias in orienting to and disengaging attention from salient task-irrelevant events in rapid serial visual presentation. Neuropsychologia, 94, 96–105.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Theeuwes, J. (1991). Exogenous and endogenous control of attention: The effect of visual onsets and offsets. Perception & Psychophysics, 49, 83–90.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211619 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Theeuwes, J. (1992). Perceptual selectivity for color and form. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 599–606.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211656 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 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

Copyright information

© The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyKorea UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations