Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Attentional set interacts with perceptual load in visual search

  • Brief Reports
  • Published:
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the present study, we examined the hypothesis that perceptual load is the primary factor that determines the efficiency of attentional selection. Participants performed a visual search task under conditions of high- and low-load. In line with the perceptual load hypothesis, presenting conditions of highand low-load in separate blocks of trials resulted in processing of to-be-ignored stimuli only in the lowload condition (Experiment 1). However when high- and low-load conditions were randomly mixed in blocks of trials, the participants showed processing of to-be-ignored stimuli in both conditions, suggesting that high perceptual load is not necessarily sufficient to obtain perceptual selectivity (Experiment 2). An analysis of intertrial transition effects showed that on high-load trials, processing of to-be-ignored stimuli occurred only when the previous trial was a low-load trial. The results suggest that low perceptual load can engender broad attentional processing. On the other hand, when a high-load trial was preceded by another high-load trial, little processing of task-irrelevant stimuli was observed. The present results are discussed in terms of the interaction between expectancies and bottom-up factors in the efficiency of attentional selection.

Article PDF

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, books and news in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.
Use our pre-submission checklist

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

References

  • Allport, D. A. (1980).Attention and performance. InG. Claxton (Ed.),Cognitive psychology: New directions (pp. 112–153). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allport, D. A., Styles, E. A., &Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.),Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421–452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broadbent, D. E. (1971).Decision and stress. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broadbent, D. E. (1982). Task combination and the selective intake of information.Acta Psychologica,50, 253–290.

    Article PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bundesen, C. (1990). A theory of visual attention.Psychological Review,97, 523–547.

    Article PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, J. A., &Deutsch, D. (1963). Attention: Some theoretical considerations.Psychological Review,70, 51–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, B. S., &Peterson, M. A. (2001). Inattentional blindness and attentional capture: Functional consequences of serial search for the perception of visual salience. In C. L. Folk & B. S. Gibson (Eds.),Attraction, distraction, and action: Interdisciplinary perspectives on attentional capture (pp. 51–76). Oxford, U.K.: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. N., McGrath, A., &McNeil, C. (2002). Cuing interacts with perceptual load in visual search.Psychological Science,13, 284–287.

    Article PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., &Treisman, A. (1984). Changing views of attention and automaticity. In R. Parasuraman & D. R. Davies (Eds.),Varieties of attention (pp. 29–61). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavie, N. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,21, 451–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavie, N. (2000). Selective attention and cognitive control: Dissociating attentional functions through different types of load. In In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.),Attention and Performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp.175–194). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavie, N., &Cox, S. (1997). On the efficiency of visual selective attention: Efficient visual search leads to inefficient distractor rejection.Psychological Science,8, 395–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavie, N. &Tsal Y. (1994). Perceptual load as a major determinant of the locus of selection in visual attention.Perception & Psychophysics,56, 183–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Los, S. A. (1996). Identifying stimuli of different perceptual categories in pure and mixed blocks of trials: Evidence for stimulus-driven switch costs.Acta Psychologica,103, 173–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maljkovic, V., &Nakayama, K. (2000). Priming of popout: III. A short-term implicit memory system beneficial for rapid target selection.Visual Cognition,7, 571–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theeuwes, J. (1991). Exogenous and endogenous control of attention: The effect of visual onsets and offsets.Perception & Psychophysics,49, 83–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theeuwes, J. (1992). Perceptual selectivity for color and form.Perception & Psychophysics,51, 599–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theeuwes, J. (1993). Visual selective attention: A theoretical analysis.Acta Psychologica,83, 93–154.

    Article PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Theeuwes, J. (1994). Stimulus-driven capture and attentional set: Selective search for color and visual abrupt onsets.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 799–806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theeuwes, J. (2004). Top-down search strategies cannot override attentional capture.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,11, 65–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treisman, A. M., &Gelade, G. (1980). A feature integration theory of attention.Cognitive Psychology,12, 97–136.

    Article PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yantis, S., &Johnston, J. C. (1990). On the locus of visual selection: Evidence from focused attention tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 135–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yantis, S., &Jonides, J. (1990). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Voluntary versus automatic allocation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 121–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cognitive Psychology, Vrije Universiteit, Van Der Boechorststraat 1, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Jan Theeuwes

  2. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois

    Arthur F. Kramer & Artem V. Belopolsky

Authors
  1. Jan Theeuwes
  2. Arthur F. Kramer
  3. Artem V. Belopolsky

Corresponding author

Correspondence toJan Theeuwes.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Theeuwes, J., Kramer, A.F. & Belopolsky, A.V. Attentional set interacts with perceptual load in visual search.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review11, 697–702 (2004). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196622

Download citation

Keywords

Use our pre-submission checklist

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Advertisement


[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp