Cognitive load modulates attentional capture by color singletons during effortful visual search

Acta Psychologica

Volumn 135, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 50-58

  Burnham, Bryan R ^a,b  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SCRANTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Attention capture; Cognitive load; Visual search; Working memory

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COLOR VISION; HUMAN; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; REACTION TIME; SHORT TERM MEMORY;

ATTENTION; COLOR PERCEPTION; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); HUMANS; MEMORY, SHORT-TERM; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; REACTION TIME;

EID: 77954386813     PISSN: 00016918     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.05.003     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Bacon W., Egeth H. Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture. Perception & Psychophysics 1994, 55:485-496.
2. Belopolsky A.V., Zwann L., Theeuwes J., Kramer A.F. The size of an attentional window modulates attentional capture by color singletons. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2007, 14:934-939.
3. Boot W.R., Brockmole J.R., Simons D.J. Attentional capture is modulated in dual-task situations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2005, 12:662-668.
4. Burnham B.R. Displaywide visual features associated with a search display's appearance can mediate attentional capture. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2007, 14:392-422.
5. Burnham, B. R. (2007b). Reduced working memory capacity leads to attentional capture by an irrelevant color singleton during inefficient visual search (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University at Albany-SUNY, Albany, NY.
6. Burnham B.R., Neely J.H., Walker P.B., Neill W.T. Interference from irrelevant colour-singletons during search depends on visual attention being spatially diffuse. Visual Cognition 2006, 14:75-78.
7. Conway A.R.A., Cowan N., Bunting M.F. The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: The importance of working memory capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2001, 8:331-335.
8. Duncan J., Humphreys G.W. Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review 1989, 96:433-458.
9. E-Prime (Version 2.0.8.22) [Computer software]. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
10. Folk C.L., Annett S. Do locally defined feature discontinuities capture attention?. Perception & Psychophysics 1994, 56:277-287.
11. Folk C.L., Remington R.W., Johnston J.C. Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance 1992, 18:1030-1044.
12. Fukuda K., Vogel E.K. Human variation in overriding attentional capture. The Journal of Neuroscience 2009, 29:8726-8733.
13. Hollands J.G., Jarmasz J. Revisiting confidence intervals for repeated measures designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2010, 17:135-138.
14. Jonides J., Yantis S. Uniqueness of abrupt visual onset in capturing attention. Perception & Psychophysics 1988, 96:29-44.
15. Kane M.J., Engle R.W. Working-memory capacity and the control of attention: The contributions of goal neglect, response competition and task set to Stroop interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2003, 132:47-70.
16. Lavie N., de Fockert J.W. The role of working memory in attentional capture. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2005, 12:669-674.
17. Lavie N., Hirst A., de Fockert J.W., Viding E. Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2004, 133:339-354.
18. Leber A.B., Egeth H.E. It's under control: Top-down search strategies can override attentional capture. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2006, 13:132-138.
19. Leber A.B., Kawahara J.-I., Gabari Y. Long-term abstract learning of attentional set. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance 2009, 35:1385-1398.
20. Logan G.D., Zbrodoff N.J. When it helps to be misled: Facilitative effects of increasing the frequency of conflicting trials in a Stroop-like task. Memory & Cognition 1979, 7:166-174.
21. Logan G.D., Zbrodoff N.J. Stroop-type interference: Congruity effects in color naming with typewritten responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance 1998, 24:978-992.
22. Melara R.D., Algom D. Driven by information: A tectonic theory of Stroop effects. Psychological Review 2003, 110:422-471.
23. Proulx M.J. Bottom-up guidance in visual search for conjunctions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2007, 33:48-56.
24. Rauschenberger R. Attentional capture by auto- and allo-cues. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2003, 10:814-842.
25. Rauschenberger R., Yantis S. Perceptual encoding efficiency in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2006, 135:116-131.
26. Sabri M., Melara R.D., Algom D. A confluence of contexts: Asymmetric versus global failures of selective attention to Stroop dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception &Performance 2001, 3:515-537.
27. Schneider W. (Version 2.0) [Computer software] 1995, Psychology Software Tools, Pittsburgh, PA.
28. Simons D.J. Attentional capture and inattentional blindness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2000, 4:147-155.
29. Sobel K.V., Gerrie M.P., Poole B.J., Kane M.J. Individual differences in working memory capacity and visual search: The roles of top-down and bottom-up processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2007, 14:840-845.
30. Stroop J.R. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1935, 18:643-662.
31. Theeuwes J. Cross-dimensional perceptual selectivity. Perception & Psychophysics 1991, 50:184-193.
32. Theeuwes J. Perceptual selectivity of color and form. Perception & Psychophysics 1992, 51:599-606.
33. Theeuwes J. Perceptual selectivity for color and form: On the nature of the interference effect. Converging operations in the study of visual attention 1995, 297-314. American Psychological Association, Washington DC. A.F. Kramer, M.G.H. Coles, G.D. Logan (Eds.).
34. Theeuwes J. Top-down strategies cannot override attentional capture. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2004, 11:65-70.
35. Theeuwes, J. (in press). Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychologica. http://www.cs.vu.nl~cogsci/cogpsy/theeuwes/.
36. Theeuwes J., Atchley P., Kramer A.F. On the time course of top-down and bottom-up control of visual attention. Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII 2000, 73-103. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. S. Monsell, J. Driver (Eds.).
37. Theeuwes J., Burger R. Attentional control during visual search: The effect of irrelevant singletons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance 1998, 24:1342-1353.
38. Townsend J.T. Serial and within-stage independent parallel model equivalence on the minimum completion time. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 1976, 14:219-238.
39. Townsend J.T. Serial vs. parallel processing: Sometimes they look like Tweedledum and Tweedledee but they can (and should) be distinguished. Psychological Science 1990, 1:46-54.
40. Townsend J.T., Wenger M.J. The serial-parallel dilemma: A case study in a linkage of theory and method. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2004, 11:391-418.
41. Treisman A.M. Features and objects: The fourteenth Bartlett memorial lecture. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. A: Human Experimental Psychology 1988, 40A:201-237.
42. Treisman A., Gelade G. A feature integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology 1980, 12:97-136.
43. Treisman A., Sato S. Conjunction search revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance 1990, 16:459-478.
44. Unsworth N., Schrock J.C., Engle R.W. Working memory capacity and the antisaccade task: Individual differences in voluntary saccade control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory & Cognition 2004, 30:1302-1321.
45. Wolfe J.M. Guided search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1994, 1:201-238.
46. Wolfe J.M. What can 1 million trials tell us about visual search?. Psychological Science 1998, 9:33-39.
47. Wolfe J.M. Asymmetries in visual search: An introduction. Perception & Psychophysics 2001, 63:381-389.
48. Wolfe J.M., Butcher S.J., Lee C., Hyle M. Changing your mind: On the top-down and bottom-up guidance in visual search for feature singletons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance 2003, 29:483-502.
49. Wolfe J.M., Cave K.R., Franzel S.L. Guided Search: An alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance 1989, 15:419-433.
50. Yantis S. Goal-directed and stimulus-driven determinants of attentional capture (tutorial). Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII 2000, 73-103. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. S. Monsell, J. Driver (Eds.).
51. Yantis S., Egeth H.E. On the distinction between visual salience and stimulus-driven attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance 1999, 25:661-676.
52. Yantis S., Johnston J.C. On the locus of visual selection: Evidence from focused attention tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance 1990, 16:135-149.