Attentional Capture Does Not Depend on Feature Similarity, but on Target-Nontarget Relations

What factors determine which stimuli of a scene will be visually selected and become available for conscious perception? The currently prevalent view is that attention operates on specific feature values, so attention will be drawn to stimuli that have features similar to those of the sought-after target. Here, we show that, instead, attentional capture depends on whether a distractor’s feature relationships match the target-nontarget relations (e.g., redder). In three spatial-cuing experiments, we found that (a) a cue with the target color (e.g., orange) can fail to capture attention when the cue–cue-context relations do not match the target-nontarget relations (e.g., redder target vs. yellower cue), whereas (b) a cue with the nontarget color can capture attention when its relations match the target-nontarget relations (e.g., both are redder). These results support a relational account in which attention is biased toward feature relationships instead of particular feature values, and show that attentional capture by an irrelevant distractor does not depend on feature similarity, but rather depends on whether the distractor matches or mismatches the target’s relative attributes (e.g., relative color).

[1]  Dissociating location-specific inhibition and attention shifts: Evidence against the disengagement account of contingent capture , 2012, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[2]  Casimir J. H. Ludwig,et al.  Stimulus-driven and goal-driven control over visual selection. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  S. Yantis,et al.  On the distinction between visual salience and stimulus-driven attentional capture. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  S. Kastner,et al.  Stimulus context modulates competition in human extrastriate cortex , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[5]  H. Spitzer,et al.  Increased attention enhances both behavioral and neuronal performance. , 1988, Science.

[6]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[7]  Zhaoping Li A saliency map in primary visual cortex , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[9]  C. Koch,et al.  A saliency-based search mechanism for overt and covert shifts of visual attention , 2000, Vision Research.

[10]  H E Egeth,et al.  Local processes in preattentive feature detection. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  What is top-down about contingent capture? , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[12]  J. Gallant,et al.  Attention to Stimulus Features Shifts Spectral Tuning of V4 Neurons during Natural Vision , 2008, Neuron.

[13]  R. Desimone,et al.  Interacting Roles of Attention and Visual Salience in V4 , 2003, Neuron.

[14]  Stefanie I. Becker,et al.  Irrelevant singletons in pop-out search: attentional capture or filtering costs? , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  J. Duncan,et al.  Visual search and stimulus similarity. , 1989, Psychological review.

[16]  Stefanie I. Becker,et al.  The role of relational information in contingent capture. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[17]  J. Theeuwes Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. , 2010, Acta psychologica.

[18]  M. Masson,et al.  Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[19]  Stefanie I. Becker,et al.  The role of target-distractor relationships in guiding attention and the eyes in visual search. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[20]  Alex D. Hwang,et al.  A model of top-down attentional control during visual search in complex scenes. , 2009, Journal of vision.

[21]  C. Koch,et al.  Attention activates winner-take-all competition among visual filters , 1999, Nature Neuroscience.

[22]  S. Yantis Stimulus-driven attentional capture and attentional control settings. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[23]  M. Posner,et al.  Orienting of Attention* , 1980, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[24]  B. Motter Neural correlates of attentive selection for color or luminance in extrastriate area V4 , 1994, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[25]  Diane M. Beck,et al.  Top-down and bottom-up mechanisms in biasing competition in the human brain , 2009, Vision Research.

[26]  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).

[27]  U. Ansorge,et al.  Top-down contingencies in peripheral cuing: The roles of color and location. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[28]  S Ullman,et al.  Shifts in selective visual attention: towards the underlying neural circuitry. , 1985, Human neurobiology.

[29]  Stefanie I. Becker,et al.  Testing a postselectional account of across-dimension switch costs , 2010, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[30]  Mounya Elhilali,et al.  Task Difficulty and Performance Induce Diverse Adaptive Patterns in Gain and Shape of Primary Auditory Cortical Receptive Fields , 2009, Neuron.

[31]  L. Itti,et al.  Search Goal Tunes Visual Features Optimally , 2007, Neuron.

[32]  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.

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

[34]  Brian A Anderson,et al.  Variations in the magnitude of attentional capture: Testing a two-process model , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[35]  Zhaoping Li,et al.  Neural Activities in V1 Create a Bottom-Up Saliency Map , 2012, Neuron.

[36]  J. Theeuwes Stimulus-driven capture and attentional set: selective search for color and visual abrupt onsets. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[37]  H. Pashler,et al.  Repetition priming in visual search: Episodic retrieval, not feature priming , 2004, Memory & cognition.

[38]  J. Serences,et al.  Adaptive Allocation of Attentional Gain , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[39]  Martin Eimer,et al.  The Roles of Feature-Specific Task Set and Bottom-Up Salience in Attentional Capture : An ERP Study , 2009 .

[40]  S. Yantis 3 Goal-Directed and Stimulus-Driven Determinants of Attentional Control , 2000 .

[41]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  Contingent attentional capture: A reply to Yantis (1993). , 1993 .

[42]  J. Serences,et al.  Basing perceptual decisions on the most informative sensory neurons. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[43]  J. Jonides Voluntary versus automatic control over the mind's eye's movement , 1981 .

[44]  M. Carrasco Visual attention: The past 25 years , 2011, Vision Research.

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

[46]  S. Treue,et al.  Feature-Based Attention Increases the Selectivity of Population Responses in Primate Visual Cortex , 2004, Current Biology.

[47]  John H. R. Maunsell,et al.  Feature-based attention in visual cortex , 2006, Trends in Neurosciences.

[48]  A. Treisman,et al.  Conjunction search revisited. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.