Independent effects of statistical learning and top-down attention
暂无分享,去创建一个
Jan Theeuwes | Ya Gao | J. Theeuwes | Ya Gao
[1] Jan Theeuwes,et al. Learning to suppress a distractor is not affected by working memory load , 2019, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.
[2] L. Chelazzi,et al. Rewards teach visual selective attention , 2013, Vision Research.
[3] J. Deutsch. Perception and Communication , 1958, Nature.
[4] Jan Theeuwes,et al. Spatial suppression due to statistical regularities is driven by distractor suppression not by target activation , 2018, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.
[5] Jeff Miller. Components of the location probability effect in visual search tasks. , 1988 .
[6] Morten H. Christiansen,et al. Domain generality versus modality specificity: the paradox of statistical learning , 2015, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.
[7] J. Jonides,et al. Overlapping mechanisms of attention and spatial working memory , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.
[8] J. Geng,et al. Reward associations and spatial probabilities produce additive effects on attentional selection , 2014, Attention, perception & psychophysics.
[9] D. E. Irwin,et al. Attention on our mind: the role of spatial attention in visual working memory. , 2011, Acta psychologica.
[10] Iain D Gilchrist,et al. Target location probability effects in visual search: an effect of sequential dependencies. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[11] Jan Theeuwes,et al. Anticipatory distractor suppression elicited by statistical regularities in visual search , 2019, bioRxiv.
[12] Jan Theeuwes,et al. OpenSesame: An open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences , 2011, Behavior Research Methods.
[13] B. Anderson. The attention habit: how reward learning shapes attentional selection , 2016, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
[14] Yuhong V Jiang,et al. Task specificity of attention training: the case of probability cuing , 2015, Attention, perception & psychophysics.
[15] Marlene Behrmann,et al. Probability Cuing of Target Location Facilitates Visual Search Implicitly in Normal Participants and Patients with Hemispatial Neglect , 2002, Psychological science.
[16] Yuhong V Jiang,et al. Visual search and location probability learning from variable perspectives. , 2013, Journal of vision.
[17] Gail M. Rosenbaum,et al. Guidance of spatial attention by incidental learning and endogenous cuing. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[18] J Miller,et al. Components of the location probability effect in visual search tasks. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[19] R. Remington,et al. The Risks of Downplaying Top-Down Control , 2018, Journal of cognition.
[20] J. Jonides,et al. Rehearsal in spatial working memory. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[21] M. Posner,et al. Orienting of Attention* , 1980, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.
[22] M. Posner,et al. Attention and the detection of signals. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology.
[23] J. Theeuwes,et al. Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: a failed theoretical dichotomy , 2012, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.
[24] Saul Sternberg,et al. The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method , 1969 .
[25] J. Theeuwes,et al. Interactions between working memory, attention and eye movements. , 2009, Acta psychologica.
[26] James L. McClelland. On the time relations of mental processes: An examination of systems of processes in cascade. , 1979 .
[27] Jan Theeuwes,et al. Visual Selection: Usually Fast and Automatic; Seldom Slow and Volitional , 2018, Journal of cognition.
[28] Jan Theeuwes,et al. Goal-driven, stimulus-driven, and history-driven selection. , 2019, Current opinion in psychology.
[29] Andrew B. Leber,et al. It’s under control: Top-down search strategies can override attentional capture , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.
[30] R. Desimone,et al. Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. , 1995, Annual review of neuroscience.
[31] Rebecca M. Todd,et al. Implicit guidance of attention: The priority state space framework , 2017, Cortex.
[32] J. Theeuwes. Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. , 2010, Acta psychologica.
[33] Jan Theeuwes,et al. Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention , 2017, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.
[34] M. Shaw,et al. Optimal allocation of cognitive resources to spatial locations. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[35] M. Behrmann,et al. Spatial probability as an attentional cue in visual search , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.
[36] M. Chun,et al. Contextual Cueing: Implicit Learning and Memory of Visual Context Guides Spatial Attention , 1998, Cognitive Psychology.
[37] Steven J. Luck,et al. “Top-down” Does Not Mean “Voluntary” , 2018, Journal of cognition.
[38] J. Wolfe,et al. Changing your mind: on the contributions of top-down and bottom-up guidance in visual search for feature singletons. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[39] F. Gregory Ashby,et al. Deriving Exact Predictions From the Cascade Model , 1982 .
[40] Yuhong V Jiang,et al. Rapid acquisition but slow extinction of an attentional bias in space. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[41] Yuhong V. Jiang,et al. Habitual versus goal-driven attention , 2017, Cortex.
[42] Jan Theeuwes,et al. Spatial working memory effects in early visual cortex , 2010, Brain and Cognition.
[43] H. Egeth. Comment on Theeuwes’s Characterization of Visual Selection , 2018, Journal of cognition.
[44] Jan Theeuwes,et al. On the limits of top-down control of visual selection , 2011, Attention, perception & psychophysics.
[45] Edgar Erdfelder,et al. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences , 2007, Behavior research methods.
[46] Jan Theeuwes,et al. How to inhibit a distractor location? Statistical learning versus active, top-down suppression , 2018, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.
[47] James W Bisley,et al. The what, where, and why of priority maps and their interactions with visual working memory , 2015, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
[48] Jan Theeuwes,et al. Statistical Regularities Modulate Attentional Capture , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[49] H. Pashler,et al. Evidence for split attentional foci. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[50] Laurent Itti,et al. An Integrated Model of Top-Down and Bottom-Up Attention for Optimizing Detection Speed , 2006, 2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'06).
[51] Leonardo Chelazzi,et al. Altering spatial priority maps via statistical learning of target selection and distractor filtering , 2017, Cortex.
[52] Jan Theeuwes,et al. Statistical regularities modulate attentional capture independent of search strategy , 2018, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.
[53] J Theeuwes,et al. Effects of location and form cuing on the allocation of attention in the visual field. , 1989, Acta psychologica.
[54] Michael Zehetleitner,et al. Probability cueing of distractor locations: both intertrial facilitation and statistical learning mediate interference reduction , 2014, Front. Psychol..