Feature-Based Statistical Regularities of Distractors Modulate Attentional Capture

Ignoring salient distracting information is paramount to efficiently guiding attention during visual search. Learning to reject or suppress these strong sources of distraction leads to more effective visual search for targets. Participants can learn to overcome salient distractors if given reliable search regularities. If salient distractors appear in 1 location more frequently than any other, the visual system can use this environmental regularity to reduce attentional capture at the more frequent location (Wang & Theeuwes, 2018). We asked if reduced attentional capture is limited to location-based regularities, or, if the visual attentional system is configured to use feature-based regularities in reducing attentional capture as well. In 4 experiments examining attentional capture by task-irrelevant color singletons, participants searched for a shape singleton target among homogenously colored distractors. Critically, on a proportion of trials, a salient, color singleton distractor was presented. Color singleton distractors that appeared at a frequent location captured attention less than color singleton distractors that appeared at infrequent locations, replicating previous findings. In subsequent experiments we manipulated the frequency of the colors of the color singleton distractors and observed robust increases in capture based on color feature regularities. Despite strong location information, we observed reliable attentional capture attenuation by frequently presented distractor colors. Our results suggest that attentional capture is attenuated by both location and feature information.

[1]  C. Koch,et al.  Computational modelling of visual attention , 2001, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[2]  Carly J. Leonard,et al.  Interactions between space-based and feature-based attention. , 2015, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  Jacob Cohen Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[4]  C Bundesen,et al.  A computational theory of visual attention. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[5]  Steven J. Luck,et al.  Suppression of overt attentional capture by salient-but-irrelevant color singletons , 2016, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[6]  S. Vecera,et al.  Establishment of an attentional set via statistical learning. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  J. Theeuwes Exogenous and endogenous control of attention: The effect of visual onsets and offsets , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  Jessica L. Irons,et al.  All set! Evidence of simultaneous attentional control settings for multiple target colors. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  Daniel B. Vatterott,et al.  Rejecting salient distractors: Generalization from experience , 2017, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[10]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  How to inhibit a distractor location? Statistical learning versus active, top-down suppression , 2018, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[11]  Nicholas Gaspelin,et al.  Distinguishing Among Potential Mechanisms of Singleton Suppression , 2017, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  Joy J Geng,et al.  Attentional capture by a perceptually salient non-target facilitates target processing through inhibition and rapid rejection. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[13]  Yoolim Hong,et al.  Implicitly learned suppression of irrelevant spatial locations , 2016, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[14]  H. Egeth,et al.  Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[15]  Dirk Kerzel,et al.  Distractor rejection in visual search breaks down with more than a single distractor feature. , 2016, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[17]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  The size of an attentional window modulates attentional capture by color singletons , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[18]  Steven J. Luck,et al.  The Role of Inhibition in Avoiding Distraction by Salient Stimuli , 2018, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[19]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  When is search for a static target among dynamic distractors efficient? , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[20]  Joshua D. Cosman,et al.  The Control of Visual Attention , 2014 .

[21]  C. Bundesen A theory of visual attention. , 1990, Psychological review.

[22]  Lynne M Reder,et al.  The adaptive character of the attentional system: statistical sensitivity in a target localization task. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[23]  Andrew B. Leber,et al.  Made you blink! Contingent attentional capture produces a spatial blink , 2002, Perception & psychophysics.

[24]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Reflections of the Environment in Memory Form of the Memory Functions , 2022 .

[25]  C. Summerfield,et al.  Attention Sharpens the Distinction between Expected and Unexpected Percepts in the Visual Brain , 2013, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[26]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Attentional and oculomotor capture with static singletons , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[27]  Eric Ruthruff,et al.  Immunity to attentional capture at ignored locations , 2017, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[28]  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.

[29]  Denis Cousineau,et al.  Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson's method , 2005 .

[30]  C. Bundesen,et al.  A neural theory of visual attention: bridging cognition and neurophysiology. , 2005, Psychological review.

[31]  M. Behrmann,et al.  Spatial probability as an attentional cue in visual search , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[32]  S. Luck,et al.  A Common Neural Mechanism for Preventing and Terminating the Allocation of Attention , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

[34]  Steven J Luck,et al.  Capture versus suppression of attention by salient singletons: Electrophysiological evidence for an automatic attend-to-me signal , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[35]  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.

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

[37]  J. Theeuwes Top-down search strategies cannot override attentional capture , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[38]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: a failed theoretical dichotomy , 2012, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[39]  Richard D. Morey,et al.  Confidence Intervals from Normalized Data: A correction to Cousineau (2005) , 2008 .

[40]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Statistical Regularities Modulate Attentional Capture , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[41]  Daniel B. Vatterott,et al.  Experience-dependent attentional tuning of distractor rejection , 2012, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[42]  Joy J. Geng,et al.  Evidence for Second-Order Singleton Suppression Based on Probabilistic Expectations , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[43]  M. Chun,et al.  Top-Down Attentional Guidance Based on Implicit Learning of Visual Covariation , 1999 .

[44]  M. Chun,et al.  Contextual Cueing: Implicit Learning and Memory of Visual Context Guides Spatial Attention , 1998, Cognitive Psychology.

[45]  T. Braver The variable nature of cognitive control: a dual mechanisms framework , 2012, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[46]  Carly J. Leonard,et al.  Direct Evidence for Active Suppression of Salient-but-Irrelevant Sensory Inputs , 2015, Psychological science.

[47]  A Treisman,et al.  Feature binding, attention and object perception. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[48]  Li Z Sha,et al.  Short-term and long-term attentional biases to frequently encountered target features , 2017, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[49]  Leonardo Chelazzi,et al.  Orchestrating Proactive and Reactive Mechanisms for Filtering Distracting Information: Brain-Behavior Relationships Revealed by a Mixed-Design fMRI Study , 2016, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

[51]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[52]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Statistical regularities modulate attentional capture independent of search strategy , 2018, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

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

[54]  Joy J. Geng,et al.  Attentional Mechanisms of Distractor Suppression , 2014 .

[55]  Leonardo Chelazzi,et al.  The costly filtering of potential distraction: evidence for a supramodal mechanism. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. General.