Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection: Reply to commentaries

Acta Psychologica

Volumn 135, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 133-139

  Theeuwes, Jan ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77957171860     PISSN: 00016918     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.07.006     Document Type: Note

References (60)

1. Anderson B.A., Folk C.L. Variations in the magnitude of attentional capture: Testing a two-process model. Attention Perception & Psychophysics 2010, 72:342-352.
2. Ansorge, U., Horstmann, G., & Scharlau, I. (2010). Top-Down contingent attentional capture during feed-forward visual processing. Acta Psychologica, 135, 123-126 (this issue).
3. Bacon W.F., Egeth H.E. Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture. Perception & Psychophysics 1994, 55:485-496.
4. Belopolsky A.V., Kramer A.F., Theeuwes J. The role of awareness in processing of oculomotor capture: evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2008, 20:2285-2297.
5. Belopolsky A.V., Schreij D., Theeuwes J. What is top down about contingent capture?. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2010, 72:326-341.
6. Belopolsky, A. V., & Theeuwes, J. (submitted). No capture outside the attentional window.
7. Belopolsky A.V., Zwaan L., Theeuwes J., Kramer A.F. The size of an attentional window modulates attentional capture by color singletons. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2007, 14:934-938.
8. Bichot N.P., Schall J.D. Priming in macaque frontal cortex during popout visual search: Feature-based facilitation and location-based inhibition of return. Journal of Neuroscience 2002, 22:4675-4685.
9. Chen P., Mordkoff J.T. Contingent capture at a very short SOA: Evidence against rapid disengagement. Visual Cognition 2007, 15:637-646.
10. Danziger S., Kingstone A. Unmasking the inhibition of return phenomenon. Perception & Psychophysics 1999, 61:1024-1037.
11. de Fockert, J. (2010). Early top-down attentional modulation in visual processing. Acta Psychologica, 135, 112-113 (this issue).
12. Desimone R. Neural mechanisms for visual memory and their role in attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 1996, 93:13494-13499.
13. Egeth H.E., Leonard C.J., Leber A.B. Why salience is not enough: Reflections on top-down selection in vision. Acta Psychologica 2010, 135:130-132. (this issue).
14. Eimer M., Kiss M. Involuntary attentional capture is determined by task set: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2008, 20:1423-1433.
15. Eimer, M., & Kiss, M. (2010). The top-down control of visual selection and how it is linked to the N2pc component. Acta Psychologica. 135, 100-102 (this issue).
16. Folk, C. L., & Remington, R. (2010). A critical evaluation of the disengagement hypothesis. Acta Psychologica, 135, 103-105 (this issue).
17. 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.
18. Geyer T., Müller H.J., Krummenacher J. Expectancies modulate attentional capture by salient color singletons. Vision Research 2008, 48:1315-1326.
19. Hernandez M., Costa A., Humphreys G.W. The size of an attentional window affects working memory guidance. Attention Perception & Psychophyicss 2010, 72:963-972.
20. Hickey, C. Chelazzi, L & Theeuwes, J. (in press-a). Reward changes salience in human vision via the anterior cingulate. Journal of Neuroscience.
21. Hickey, C. Chelazzi, L & Theeuwes, J. (in press-b). Reward has a residual impact on target selection in visual search, but not on the suppression of distractors. Visual Cognition.
22. Hickey C., van Zoest W., Theeuwes J. The time course of exogenous and endogenous control of covert attention. Experimental Brain Research 2010, 201:789-796.
23. Olivers C.N.L., Hickey C. Priming resolves perceptual ambiguity in visual search: Evidence from behaviour and electrophysiology. Vision Research 2010, 50:1362-1371.
24. Kaptein N.A., Theeuwes J., van der Heijden A.H.C. Search for a conjunctively defined target can be selectively limited to a color-defined subset of elements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1995, 21:1053-1069.
25. Kawahara, J. (2010). Identifying a "default" visual search mode with operant conditioning. Acta Psychologica 135, 38-49.
26. Kristjánsson, A. (2010). Priming in visual search: A spanner in the works for Theeuwes's bottom-up attention sweeps. Acta Psychologica, 135, 114-116 (this issue).
27. Kristjánsson Á., Sigurjónsdóttir Ó., Driver J. Fortune and reversals of fortune in visual search: Reward contingencies for pop-out targets affect search efficiency and target repetition effects. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2010, 72:1229-1236.
28. Kiss M., Van Velzen J., Eimer M. The N2pc component and its links to attention shifts and spatially selective visual processing. Psychophysiology 2008, 45:240-249.
29. Lamme V.A.F., Roelfsema P.R. The distinct modes of vision offered by feedforward and recurrent processing. Trends in Neuroscience 2000, 23:571-579.
30. Lamy, D. (2010). Reevaluating the disengagement hypothesis. Acta Psychologica, 135, 127-129 (this issue).
31. Lamy D., Carmel T., Egeth H.E., Leber A.B. Effects of search mode and intertrial priming on singleton search. Perception & Psychophysics 2006, 68:919-932.
32. Lamy D., Egeth H.E. Attentional capture in singleton-detection and feature-search modes. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance 2003, 29:1003-1020.
33. Lamy D., Leber A., Egeth H.E. Effects of task relevance and stimulus-driven salience in feature-search mode. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance 2004, 30(6):1019-1031.
34. Lamy D., Yashar A. Intertrial target-feature changes do not lead to more distraction by singletons: target uncertainty does. Vision Research 2008, 48:1274-1279.
35. Mulckhuyse, M., & Theeuwes, J. (2010). Unconscious attentional orienting to exogenous cues: a review of the literature. Acta Psychologica, 134, 299-309.
36. Müller H.J., Krummenacher J. Locus of dimension weighting: Preattentive or postselective?. Visual Cognition 2006, 14:490-513.
37. Müller H.J., Reimann B., Krummenacher J. Visual search for singleton feature targets across dimensions: Stimulus and expectancy-driven effects in dimensional weighing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2003, 29:1021-1035.
38. Müller, H. J., Töllner, T., Zehetleitner, M., Geyer, T., Rangelov, D., & Krummenacher, J. (2010). Dimension-based attention modulates feed-forward visual processing. Acta Psychologica, 135, 117-122 (this issue).
39. Nordfang, M., & Bundesen, C. (2010). Is initial visual selection completely stimulus-driven? Acta Psychologica. 135, 106-108 (this issue).
40. Ogawa T., Komatsu H. Target selection in area V4 during a multidimensional visual search task. Journal of Neuroscience 2004, 24:6371-6382.
41. Pachella R.G. The interpretation of reaction time in information processing research. Human Information Processing: Tutorials in Performance and Cognition 1974, 41-82. Halstead, New York. B. Kantowitz (Ed.).
42. 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.
43. Posner M.I. Orienting of attention, The VIIth Sir Frederic Bartlett Lecture. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1980, 32:3-25.
44. Rauschenberger R. Reentrant processing in attentional guidance - time to abandon old dichotomies. Acta Psychologica 2010, 135:109-111. (this issue).
45. Schreij D., Theeuwes J., Olivers C.N.L. Irrelevant onsets cause inhibition of return regardless of attentional set. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics 2010, 72:672-682.
46. Theeuwes J. Exogenous and endogenous control of attention: The effect of visual onsets and offsets. Perception & Psychophysics 1991, 49:83-90.
47. Theeuwes J. Endogenous and exogenous control of visual selection. Perception 1994, 23:429-440.
48. Theeuwes J. Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychologica 2010, 135:77-99. (this issue).
49. Theeuwes J., Godijn R. Irrelevant singletons capture attention: evidence from inhibition of return. Perception & Psychophysics 2002, 64:764-770.
50. Theeuwes J., Godijn R., Pratt J. A new estimation of the duration of attentional dwell time. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2004, 11:60-64.
51. Theeuwes J., Kramer A.F., Hahn S., Irwin D.E. Our eyes do not always go where we want them to go: Capture of the eyes by new objects. Psychological Science 1998, 9:379-385.
52. Theeuwes J., Reimann B., Mortier K. Visual search for featural singletons: No top-down modulation, only bottom-up priming. Visual Cognition 2006, 14:466-489.
53. Theeuwes J., Van der Burg E. The role of spatial and nonspatial information in visual selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2007, 33:1335-1351.
54. Theeuwes J., Van der Burg E. The role of cueing in attentional capture. Visual Cognition 2008, 16:232-247.
55. Thompson K.G., Bichot N.P. A visual salience map in the primate frontal eye field. Progress in Brain Research 2005, 147:251-262.
56. Van der Stigchel S., Meeter M., Theeuwes J. Eye movement trajectories and what they tell us. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 2006, 30:666-679.
57. van Zoest W., Donk M., Theeuwes J. The role of stimulus-driven and goal-driven control in visual selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2004, 30:746-759.
58. 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 2003, 29:483-502.
59. Yantis S., Jonides J. Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Voluntary versus automatic allocation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1990, 16:121-134.
60. Zhang W., Luck S.J. Feature-based attention modulates feedforward visual processing. Nature Neuroscience 2009, 12:24-25.