The Role of Target-Distractor Relationships in Guiding Attention and the Eyes in Visual Search

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Volumn 139, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 247-265

  Becker, Stefanie I ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Contingent capture; Feature priming; Irrelevant distractor; Linear separability; Visual search

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COLOR VISION; EYE MOVEMENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION; VISION;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTENTION; COLOR PERCEPTION; EYE MOVEMENTS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SIZE PERCEPTION; VISION, OCULAR;

EID: 77954782012     PISSN: 00963445     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0018808     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Ansorge U., Heumann M. Top-down contingencies in peripheral cueing: The roles of color and location. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2003, 29:937-948.
2. Ansorge U., Heumann M. Peripheral cuing by abrupt-onset cues: The influence of color in S-R corresponding conditions. Acta Psychologica 2004, 116:115-143.
3. Ansorge U., Horstmann G. Preemptive control of attentional capture by color: Evidence from trial-by-trial analyses and orderings of onsets of capture effects in reaction time distributions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2007, 60:952-975.
4. Bacon W.F., Egeth H.E. Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture. Perception & Psychophysics 1994, 55:485-496.
5. Bargh J.A. Conditional automaticity: Varieties of automatic influence in social perception and cognition. Unintended thought 1989, 3-51. Guilford Press, New York, NY. J.A. Bargh, J.S. Ulman (Eds.).
6. Bargh J.A. The ecology of automaticity: Toward establishing the conditions needed to produce automatic processing effects. American Journal of Psychology 1992, 105:181-199.
7. Bauer B., Jolicoeur P., Cowan W.B. Distractor heterogeneity versus linear separability in color visual search. Perception 1996, 25:1281-1293.
8. Bauer B., Jolicoeur P., Cowan W.B. Visual search for color targets that are or are not linearly separable from distractors. Vision Research 1996, 36:1439-1465.
9. Bauer B., Jolicoeur P., Cowan W.B. The linear separability effect in color visual search: Ruling out the additive color hypothesis. Perception & Psychophysics 1998, 60:1083-1093.
10. Becker S.I. Irrelevant singletons in pop-out search: Attentional capture or filtering costs?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2007, 33:764-787.
11. Becker S.I. Can intertrial effects of features and dimensions be explained by a single theory?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2008, 34:1417-1440.
12. Becker S.I. The mechanism of priming: Episodic retrieval or priming of pop-out?. Acta Psychologica 2008, 127:324-329.
13. Becker S.I. The stage of priming: Are intertrial repetition effects attentional or decisional?. Vision Research 2008, 48:664-684.
14. Becker S.I., Ansorge U., Horstmann G. Can intertrial priming account for the similarity effect in visual search?. Vision Research 2009, 49:1738-1756.
15. Becker, S. I., Folk, C. L., & Remington, R. W. (2009). The role of relational or contextual information in contingent capture. Manuscript submitted for publication.
16. Becker S.I., Horstmann G. A feature weighting account of priming in conjunction search. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2009, 71:258-272.
17. Deubel H., Schneider W.X. Saccade target selection and object recognition: Evidence for a common attentional mechanism. Vision Research 1996, 36:1827-1837.
18. Duncan J., Humphreys G.W. Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review 1989, 96:433-458.
19. D'Zmura M. Color in visual search. Vision Research 1991, 31:951-966.
20. Fecteau J.H. Priming of pop-out depends upon the current goals of observers. Journal of Vision 2007, 7:1-11.
21. Folk C.L., Remington R. Selectivity in distraction by irrelevant featural singletons: Evidence for two forms of attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1998, 24:847-858.
22. Folk C.L., Remington R.W. Bottom-up priming of top-down attentional control settings. Visual Cognition 2008, 16:215-231.
23. Folk C.L., Remington R.W., Johnston J.C. Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1992, 18:1030-1044.
24. Folk C.L., Remington R.W., Johnston J.C. Contingent attentional capture: A reply to Yantis (1993). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1993, 19:682-685.
25. Geyer T., Mueller H.J., Krummenacher J. Cross-trial priming in visual search for singleton conjunction targets: Role of repeated target and distractor features. Perception & Psychophysics 2006, 68:736-749.
26. Hillstrom A.P. Repetition effects in visual search. Perception & Psychophysics 2000, 62:800-817.
27. Hodsoll J., Humphreys G.W. Driving attention with the top down: The relative contribution of target templates to the linear separability effect in the size dimension. Perception & Psychophysics 2001, 63:918-926.
28. Hodsoll J.P., Humphreys G.W., Braithwaite J.J. Dissociating the effects of similarity, salience, and top-down processes in search for linearly separable size targets. Perception & Psychophysics 2006, 68:558-570.
29. Huang L., Pashler H. Expectation and repetition effects in searching for featural singletons in very brief displays. Perception & Psychophysics 2005, 67:150-157.
30. Itti L., Koch C. A saliency-based search mechanism for overt and covert shifts of visual attention. Vision Research 2000, 40:1489-1506.
31. Kristjansson A., Wang D., Nakayama K. The role of priming in conjunctive visual search. Cognition 2002, 85:37-52.
32. Lamy D., Antebi C., Aviani N., Carmel T. Priming of pop-out provides reliable measures of target activation and distractor inhibition in selective attention. Vision Research 2008, 48:30-41.
33. Leonard C.J., Egeth H.E. Attentional guidance in singleton search: An examination of top-down, bottom-up, and intertrial factors. Visual Cognition 2008, 16:1078-1091.
34. Ludwig C.J.H., Gilchrist I.D. Stimulus-driven and goal-driven control over visual selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2002, 28:902-912.
35. Ludwig C.J.H., Gilchrist I.D. Goal-driven modulation of oculomotor capture. Perception & Psychophysics 2003, 65:1243-1251.
36. Maljkovic V., Nakayama K. Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features. Memory & Cognition 1994, 22:657-672.
37. Maljkovic V., Nakayama K. Priming of pop-out: II. The role of position. Perception & Psychophysics 1996, 58:977-991.
38. McPeek R.M., Maljkovic V., Nakayama K. Saccades require focal attention and are facilitated by a short-term memory system. Vision Research 1999, 39:1555-1566.
39. Müller H.J., Heller D., Ziegler J. Visual search for singleton feature targets within and across feature dimensions. Perception & Psychophysics 1995, 57:1-17.
40. Navalpakkam V., Itti L. Top-down attention selection is fine grained. Journal of Vision 2006, 6:1180-1193.
41. Navalpakkam V., Itti L. Search goal tunes visual features optimally. Neuron 2007, 53:605-617.
42. Olivers C.N.L., Humphreys G.W. Attentional guidance by salient feature singletons depends on intertrial contingencies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2003, 29:650-657.
43. Peterson M.S., Kramer A.E., Irwin D.E. Covert shifts of attention precede involuntary eye movements. Perception & Psychophysics 2004, 66:398-405.
44. Pinto Y., Olivers C.N.L., Theeuwes J. Target uncertainty does not lead to more distraction by singletons: Intertrial priming does. Perception & Psychophysics 2005, 67:1354-1361.
45. Theeuwes J. Cross-dimensional perceptual selectivity. Perception & Psychophysics 1991, 50:184-193.
46. Theeuwes J. Perceptual selectivity for color and form. Perception & Psychophysics 1992, 51:599-606.
47. Treisman A. Features and objects: The 14th Bartlett Memorial Lecture. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1988, 40:201-237.
48. Treisman A., Gelade G. A feature integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology 1980, 12:97-136.
49. Treisman A., Sato S. Conjunction search revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1990, 16:459-478.
50. Wolfe J.M. Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1994, 1:202-238.
51. Wolfe J.M. Visual search. Attention 1998, 30-73. University College London Press, London, England. H. Pashler (Ed.).
52. Wolfe J.M. What do 1,000,000 trials tell us about visual search?. Psychological Science 1998, 9:33-39.
53. Wolfe, J. M., & Bose, M. M. (1991). Visual search for the " medium" stimulus. Unpublished research report, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
54. Wolfe J.M., Butcher S.J., Lee C., Hyle M. Changing your mind: On the contributions of top-down and bottom-up guidance in visual search for feature singletons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2003, 29:483-502.
55. 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 and Performance 1989, 15:419-433.
56. Yantis S. Goal-directed and stimulus-driven determinants of attentional control. Attention & Performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes 2000, 73-103. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. S. Monsell, J. Driver (Eds.).