Visual search for singleton feature targets across dimensions: Stimulus- and expectancy-driven effects in dimensional weighting.

Four pop-out search experiments investigated whether dimension-based visual attention is top-down modulable. Observers searched for singleton feature targets defined, variably across trials, by a color or an orientation difference to nontargets. Observers were precued to the most probable target-defining dimension (e.g., by the word color) or feature (red) on a given trial. Results revealed expedited reaction times (RTs) for valid-dimension targets relative to neutral-cue conditions, and slowed RTs for invalid-dimension targets. Cue information as to precise target feature yielded some extra effect only for color targets. The dimensional cuing significantly reduced, but did not abolish, the dimension-specific influence of the previous target on detection of the current target (same-dimension RT < different-dimension RT). These findings confirm that top-down dimensional set modulates stimulus-driven dimension processes in the detection of pop-out signals. ((c) 2003 APA, all rights reserved)

[1]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Dimension‐specific intertrial facilitation in visual search for pop‐out targets: Evidence for a top‐down modulable visual short‐term memory effect , 2004 .

[2]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Visual search for dimensionally redundant pop-out targets: parallel-coactive processing of dimensions is location specific. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  H. Müller,et al.  Visual search for dimensionally redundant pop-out targets: Evidence for parallel-coactive processing of dimensions , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[4]  J. Driver,et al.  Control of Cognitive Processes: Attention and Performance XVIII , 2000 .

[5]  Herbert Heuer,et al.  Hierarchical switching in a multi-dimensional task space , 1999 .

[6]  R. Remington,et al.  Selectivity in distraction by irrelevant featural singletons: evidence for two forms of attentional capture. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  Ken Nakayama,et al.  Attentional requirements in a ‘preattentive’ feature search task , 1997, Nature.

[8]  Jeremy M. Wolfe,et al.  Just Say No: How Are Visual Searches Terminated When There Is No Target Present? , 1996, Cognitive Psychology.

[9]  T. Papathomas.  Early vision and beyond , 1995 .

[10]  Marvin M. Chun,et al.  Making use of texton gradients: visual search and perceptual grouping exploit the same parallel processes in different ways , 1995 .

[11]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features , 1994, Memory & cognition.

[12]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Guided Search 2.0 A revised model of visual search , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[13]  H. Nothdurft.  The role of features in preattentive vision: Comparison of orientation, motion and color cues , 1993, Vision Research.

[14]  J. Theeuwes.  Perceptual selectivity for color and form , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[15]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  H. Nothdurft.  Feature analysis and the role of similarity in preattentive vision , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  M. Goodale,et al.  Separate visual pathways for perception and action , 1992, Trends in Neurosciences.

[18]  D. Meyer,et al.  Analyses of multinomial mixture distributions: new tests for stochastic models of cognition and action. , 1991, Psychological bulletin.

[19]  David LaBerge,et al.  Thalamic and Cortical Mechanisms of Attention Suggested by Recent Positron Emission Tomographic Experiments , 1990, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[20]  Jeremy M Wolfe,et al.  Modeling the role of parallel processing in visual search , 1990, Cognitive Psychology.

[21]  A. Treisman.  Features and Objects: The Fourteenth Bartlett Memorial Lecture , 1988, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[22]  J. Findlay,et al.  Sensitivity and criterion effects in the spatial cuing of visual attention , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[23]  Robert Nullmeyer,et al.  Application of variable criterion theory to choice reaction time , 1977 .

[24]  D. Alanallport.  Parallel encoding within and between elementary stimulus dimensions , 1971 .

[25]  A. Treisman.  Strategies and models of selective attention. , 1969, Psychological review.

[26]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  Common Mechanisms in Perception and Action: Attention and Performance Volume Xix , 2001 .

[27]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Attentional and oculomotor capture , 2001 .

[28]  B. Gibson,et al.  Attraction, Distraction and Action: Multiple Perspectives on Attentional Capture. Advances in Psychology , 2001 .

[29]  A. Hillstrom.  Repetition effects in visual search , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[30]  A. Cohen,et al.  Intra- and cross-dimensional visual search for single-feature targets , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[31]  David E. Irwin,et al.  Influence of attentional capture on oculomotor control. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[32]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Attentional effects on preattentive vision: spatial precues affect the detection of simple features. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[33]  J. Theeuwes.  Perceptual Selectivity for Color and Form: On the Nature of the Interference Effect , 1996 .

[34]  G. Logan,et al.  Converging operations in the study of visual selective attention , 1996 .

[35]  H. Müller,et al.  Searching for unknown feature targets on more than one dimension: Investigating a “dimension-weighting” account , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[36]  H J Müller,et al.  Visual search for singleton feature targets within and across feature dimensions , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

[37]  M. Goodale,et al.  The visual brain in action , 1995 .

[38]  M. Moscovitch,et al.  Attention and Performance 15: Conscious and Nonconscious Information Processing , 1994 .

[39]  W. Schneider,et al.  Space-based visual attention models and object selection: Constraints, problems, and possible solutions , 1993, Psychological research.

[40]  D. LaBerge,et al.  Theory of attentional operations in shape identification. , 1989 .

[41]  J. Duncan.  Selective attention and the organization of visual information. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[42]  Leslie G. Ungerleider.  Two cortical visual systems , 1982 .

[43]  R. Mansfield,et al.  Analysis of visual behavior , 1982 .

[44]  G. Claxton.  Cognitive psychology: New directions , 1980 .