Probability cueing of distractor locations: Both intertrial facilitation and statistical learning mediate interference reduction

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn 5, Issue OCT, 2014, Pages

  Goschy, Harriet ^a,b   Bakos, Sarolta ^a   Mueller, Hermann Josef ^a,c   Zehetleitner, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b Graduate School of Systemic Neurosciences   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Attentional capture; Intertrial facilitation; Probability cueing; Statistical learning; Visual search

Indexed keywords

EID: 84907616934     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01195     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108, 624-652.
2. Caparos, S. & Linnell, K.J. (2009). The interacting effect of load and space on visual selective attention. Visual Cognition, 17, 1218-1227.
3. Chun, M. M., & Jiang, Y. (1998). Contextual cueing: Implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention. Cognitive Psychology, 36, 28-71.
4. Corballis, P. M., & Gratton, G. (2003). Independent control of processing strategies for different locations in the visual field. Biological Psychology, 64, 191-209.
5. Crump, M. J. C., Gong, Z., & Milliken, B. (2006). The context-specific proportion congruent Stroop effect: Location as a contextual cue. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 316- 321.
6. Druker, M., & Anderson, B. (2010). Spatial probability aids visual stimulus discrimination. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 4, 63.
7. Fecteau, J. H., Korjoukov, I., & Roelfsema, P. R. (2009). Location and color biases have different influences on selective attention. Vision Research, 49, 996-1005.
8. Forster, S., & Lavie, N. (2008). Attentional capture by entirely irrelevant distractors. Visual Cognition, 16, 200-214.
9. Found, A., & Müller, H. J. (1996). Searching for unknown feature targets on more than one dimension: Investigating a "dimension-weighting" account. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 88-101.
10. Geng, J. J., & Behrmann, M. (2002). Probability cuing of target location facilitates visual search implicitly in normal participants and patients with hemispatial neglect. Psychological Science, 13, 520-525.
11. Geng, J. J., & Behrmann, M. (2005). Spatial probability as an attentional cue in visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 1252-1268.
12. Geyer, T., Müller, H. J., & Krummenacher, J. (2008). Expectancies modulate attentional capture by salient color singletons. Vision Research, 48, 1315-1326.
13. Geyer, T., Zehetleitner, M., & Müller, H. J. (2010). Positional priming of pop-out: A relational-encoding account. Journal of Vision, 10, 1-17.
14. Hickey, C. & Theeuwes, J. (2011). Context and competition in the capture of visual attention. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73, 2053-2064.
15. Hodgson, T. L., Müller, H. J., & O'Leary, M. J. (1999). Attentional localization prior to simple and directed manual responses. Perception, & Psychophysics, 61, 308-321.
16. Hoffmann, J., & Kunde, W. (1999). Location-specific target expectancies in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1127- 1141.
17. Jiang, Y. V., Swallow, K. M., & Rosenbaum, G. M. (2013). Guidance of spatial attention by incidental learning and endogenous cuing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 285-297.
18. Jiang, Y. V., Swallow, K. M., Rosenbaum, G. M., & Herzig, C. (2013). Rapid acquisition but slow extinction of an attentional bias in space. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 87-99.
19. Jones, J. L., & Kaschak, M. P. (2012). Global statistical learning in a visual search task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 152- 160.
20. Kabata, T., & Matsumoto, E. (2012). Cueing effects of target location probability and repetition. Vision Research, 73, 23-29.
21. Kelley, T. A., & Yantis, S. (2009). Learning to attend: effects of practice on information selection. Journal of Vision, 9, 1-18.
22. Koch, A. I., Müller, H. J., & Zehetleitner, M. (2013). Distractors less salient than targets capture attention rather than producing non-spatial filtering costs. Acta Psychologica, 144, 61-72.
23. Kristjánsson, á., Vuilleumier, P., Schwartz, S., Macaluso, E., & Driver, J. (2007). Neural basis for priming of pop-out during visual search revealed with fMRI. Cerebral Cortex, 17, 1612-1624.
24. Krummenacher, J., Müller, H. J., Zehetleitner, M., & Geyer, T. (2009). Dimension- and space-based intertrial effects in visual pop-out search: Modulation by task demands for focal-attentional processing. Psychological Research, 73, 186-197.
25. Kumada, T., & Humphreys, G. W. (2002). Cross-dimensional interference and cross-trial inhibition. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 493-503.
26. Maljkovic, V., & Nakayama, K. (1996). Priming of pop-out: II. The role of position. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 977-991.
27. Miller, J. (1988). Components of the location probability effect in visual search tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 453- 471.
28. Mounts, J. R. (2000). Attentional capture by abrupt onsets and feature singletons produces inhibitory surrounds. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 1485-1493.
29. Mounts, J. R. (2005). Attentional selection: A salience-based competition for representation. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 1190-1198.
30. Mounts, J. R. & Gavett, B. E. (2004). The role of salience in localized attentional interference. Vision Research, 44, 1575-1588.
31. Müller, H. J., & Findlay, J. M. (1987). Sensitivity and criterion effects in the spatial cueing of visual attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 42, 383-399.
32. Müller, H. J., Geyer, T., Zehetleitner, M., & Krummenacher, J. (2009). Attentional capture by salient color singleton distractors is modulated by top-down dimensional set. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1-16.
33. Müller, H. J., Heller, D., & Ziegler, J. (1995). Visual search for singleton feature targets within and across feature dimensions. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 1-17.
34. Müller, N. G., Mollenhauer, M., Rösler, A., & Kleinschmidt, A. (2005). The attentional field has a Mexican hat distribution. Vision Research, 45, 1129-1137.
35. Munneke, J., Van der Stigchel, S., & Theeuwes, J. (2008). Cueing the location of a distractor: An inhibitory mechanism of spatial attention? Acta Psychologica, 129, 101-107.
36. Reder, L. M., Weber, K., Shang, J., & Vanyukov, P. M. (2003). The adaptive character of the attentional system: Statistical sensitivity in a target localization task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 631-649.
37. Reutter, D., & Zehetleitner, M. (2012). Experiment Toolbox for psychophysical experiments under MATLAB [http://sourceforge.net/projects/exptoolbox/].
38. Sayim, B., Grubert, A., Herzog, M. H., & Krummenacher, J. (2010). Display probability modulates attentional capture by onset distractors. Journal of Vision, 10, 1-8.
39. Shaw, M. L. (1978). A capacity allocation model for reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4, 586-598.
40. Shaw, M. L., & Shaw, P. (1977). Optimal allocation of cognitive resources to spatial locations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 201-211.
41. Theeuwes, J. (1992). Perceptual selectivity for color and form. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 599-606.
42. Turatto, M., Galfano, G., Gardini, S., & Mascetti, G. G. (2004). Stimulus-driven attentional capture: An empirical comparison of display-size and distance methods. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 57, 297-324.
43. Van der Stigchel, S., & Theeuwes, J. (2006). Our eyes deviate away from a location where a distractor is expected to appear. Experimental Brain Research, 169, 338-349.
44. Walthew, C., & Gilchrist, I. D. (2006). Target location probability effects in visual search: An effect of sequential dependencies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 1294-1301.
45. Wendt, M., Kluwe, R. H., & Vietze, I. (2008). Location-specific versus hemisphere-specific adaptation of processing selectivity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 135-140.
46. Wolfe, J. M. (1994). Guided search 2.0-A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 202-238.
47. Wolfe, J. M., Cave, K. R., & Franzel, S. L. (1989). Guided search: An alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 419-433.
48. Zehetleitner, M., Goschy, H., & Müller, H. J. (2012). Top-down control of attention: It's gradual, practice-dependent, and hierarchically organized. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 941-957.
49. Zehetleitner, M., Krummenacher, J., & Müller, H. J. (2009). The detection of feature singletons defined in two dimensions is based on salience summation, rather than on serial exhaustive or interactive race architectures. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71, 1739-1759.