Control of attention by a peripheral visual cue depends on whether the target is difficult to discriminate.

The influence of a peripheral cue represented by a gray ring on responsivity to a subsequent target varies. When a vertical line inside a ring was a go target and a white small ring inside a ring was a no-go target, reaction time was shorter at the same location relative to a different location. However, no reaction time difference between the two locations occurred when a white cross inside the ring, instead of the white vertical line inside the ring, was the go target. We investigated whether this last finding was due to a forward masking influence of the cue, a requirement of low attention for the discrimination or a lack of attention mobilization by the cue. In Experiment 1, the intensity of the cue was reduced in an attempt to reduce forward masking. In Experiment 2, the vertical line and the cross were presented in the same block of trials so as to be dealt with a common attentional strategy. In Experiments 3 and 4, the no-go target was a 45 masculine rotated cross inside a ring to increase the difficulty of the discrimination. No evidence was obtained that the cross was forward masked by the cue nor that it demanded less attention to be discriminated from the small ring. There was a facilitation of responsivity by the cue when the small ring was replaced by the rotated cross. The results suggest that when the discrimination to be performed is too easy the cue does not mobilize attention.

[1]  C. Koch,et al.  Spatial vision thresholds in the near absence of attention , 1997, Vision Research.

[2]  M. Cheal,et al.  Benefits from attention depend on the target type in location-precued discrimination. , 1992, Acta psychologica.

[3]  Bruno G. Breitmeyer,et al.  Visual masking : an integrative approach , 1984 .

[4]  Anthony Lambert,et al.  Do isoluminant color changes capture attention? , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[5]  L. Chelazzi,et al.  Do peripheral non-informative cues induce early facilitation of target detection? , 1994, Vision Research.

[6]  Laurence R. Harris,et al.  Vision and Attention , 2001 .

[7]  J. Lupiáñez,et al.  A review of attentional capture: On its automaticity and sensitivity to endogenous control. , 2002 .

[8]  G Chastain,et al.  Is rapid performance improvement across short precue-target delays due to masking from peripheral precues? , 1992, Acta psychologica.

[9]  C Alain,et al.  Attentional set modulates visual areas: an event-related potential study of attentional capture. , 2001, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[10]  P. Atchley,et al.  Contingent capture for onsets and offsets: attentional set for perceptual transients. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  R W Remington,et al.  The structure of attentional control: contingent attentional capture by apparent motion, abrupt onset, and color. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  B. Gibson,et al.  Stimulus-driven attentional capture is contingent on attentional set for displaywide visual features. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  S. Tipper,et al.  On the Strategic Modulation of the Time Course of Facilitation and Inhibition of Return , 2001, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[14]  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.

[15]  G. Tassinari,et al.  Sensory and attentional components of slowing of manual reaction time to non-fixated visual targets by ipsilateral primes , 1993, Vision Research.

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

[17]  L. E. Ribeiro-do-Valle,et al.  Priming effects of a peripheral visual stimulus in simple and go/no-go tasks. , 2003, Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologicas.

[18]  Christian Keysers,et al.  Visual masking and RSVP reveal neural competition , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[19]  A. Lambert,et al.  Peripheral visual changes and spatial attention. , 1991, Acta psychologica.

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

[21]  J. Henderson,et al.  The spatial distribution of attention following an exogenous cue , 1993, Perception & psychophysics.

[22]  S. Steinman,et al.  Vision and Attention. I: Current Models of Visual Attention , 1998, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

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

[24]  L. E. Ribeiro-do-Valle,et al.  The early facilitatory effect of a peripheral spatially noninformative prime stimulus depends on target stimulus features. , 2001, Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologicas.

[25]  E. Yund,et al.  Attentional Inhibition or Paracontrast? , 1999, Brain and Cognition.