Attention, perception & psychophysics
-
In contextual cuing (CC), reaction times for finding targets are faster in repeated displays than in displays that have never been seen before. This has been demonstrated using target-distractor configurations, global background colors, naturalistic scenes, and covariation of targets with distractors. The majority of CC studies have used displays in which the target is always present. ⋯ Experiment 2 showed that there is no CC when the same spatial layout can be both target present and target absent on different trials. The presence of distractors in locations that had contained targets on other trials appeared to interfere with CC, and even disrupted the expression of CC in previously learned contexts (Exps. 3-5). These results show that target-distractor associations are the important element in producing CC and that, consistent with a response selection account, changing the response type from an orientation task to a detection task removes the CC effect.
-
Atten Percept Psychophys · Oct 2011
Absence of attentional capture in parallel search is possible: a failure to replicate attentional capture in a non-singleton target search task.
The notion of a singleton versus a feature search mode (Bacon & Egeth, 1994) in visual search is generally widely accepted. Yet Theeuwes (2004) claimed a different, potentially more parsimonious position. He suggested that the size of an attentional window is under top-down control and that salient distractors within this window capture attention. ⋯ Experiment 4 was similar to Experiment 1 but incorporated further details that may account for the discrepant findings. Still, no attentional capture was found. In sum, it was not possible to replicate a crucial piece of evidence for the attentional window hypothesis, and our results are more consistent with the assumption of two different search modes.