Fractionating the preview benefit in search: dual-task decomposition of visual marking by timing and modality.

Providing participants with a preview of half the distractors in a visual search task facilitates performance. The present study examined the effects of secondary tasks on the preview benefit in search. Participants had to attend to a visual or an auditory stream of digits that began either (a) at the onset of the preview or (b) after the preview. Secondary tasks that onset with the preview disrupted the preview benefit irrespective of their modality. Only visual secondary tasks disrupted the benefit in the delayed condition. These selective interference effects suggest that the preview benefit can be fractionated into 2 components: an initialization component that involves modality-independent resources and a maintenance component that depends on visual resources. Results are discussed in relation to theoretical accounts of the preview benefit in search.

[1]  Olaf B. Paulson,et al.  Parieto–Occipital Areas Involved in Efficient Filtering in Search: A Time Course Analysis of Visual Marking using Behavioural and Functional Imaging Procedures , 2004, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[2]  G. Humphreys,et al.  When visual marking meets the attentional blink: More evidence for top-down, limited capacity inhibition , 2002 .

[3]  Marvin M Chun,et al.  Visual marking: selective attention to asynchronous temporal groups. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  J Theeuwes,et al.  Visual marking beside the mark: Prioritizing selection by abrupt onsets , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[5]  D G Watson,et al.  Visual marking in moving displays: Feature-based inhibition is not necessary , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[6]  H. Müller,et al.  Probing distractor inhibition in visual search: inhibition of return. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  A. Yagi,et al.  Inhibitory tagging in visual search can be found if search stimuli remain visible , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  Derrick G. Watson,et al.  Visual marking: Evidence for inhibition using a probe-dot detection paradigm , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[9]  R. Klein,et al.  Inhibition of Return is a Foraging Facilitator in Visual Search , 1999 .

[10]  K. Arnell,et al.  The attentional blink across stimulus modalities: Evidence for central processing limitations. , 1999 .

[11]  R Blake,et al.  Visual form created solely from temporal structure. , 1999, Science.

[12]  P. Jolicoeur.  Restricted attentional capacity between sensory modalities , 1999, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[13]  Janice J. Snyder,et al.  Inhibition of return to successively stimulated locations in a sequential visual search paradigm. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  R. Blake,et al.  Visual features that vary together over time group together over space , 1998, Nature Neuroscience.

[15]  Derrick G. Watson,et al.  Visual marking of moving objects: a role for top-down feature-based inhibition in selection. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  B. Julesz,et al.  Withdrawing attention at little or no cost: Detection and discrimination tasks , 1998, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Visual marking of old objects , 1998 .

[18]  R Blake,et al.  Spatial and temporal coherence in perceptual binding. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[20]  John Duncan,et al.  Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities , 1997, Nature.

[21]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Visual marking: prioritizing selection for new objects by top-down attentional inhibition of old objects. , 1997, Psychological review.

[22]  S. Yantis,et al.  Visual attention: control, representation, and time course. , 1997, Annual review of psychology.

[23]  Z W Pylyshyn,et al.  Searching through subsets: a test of the visual indexing hypothesis. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[24]  UTE LEONARDS,et al.  The Influence of Temporal Phase Differences on Texture Segmentation , 1996, Vision Research.

[25]  S. Tipper,et al.  Object-based and environment-based inhibition of return of visual attention. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[26]  S. Yantis,et al.  Stimulus-driven attentional capture: evidence from equiluminant visual objects. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[27]  J. Braun.  Visual search among items of different salience: removal of visual attention mimics a lesion in extrastriate area V4 , 1994, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[28]  Z. Pylyshyn,et al.  What enumeration studies can show us about spatial attention: evidence for limited capacity preattentive processing. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[30]  K L Shapiro,et al.  Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: an attentional blink? . , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[31]  S. Yantis,et al.  Mechanisms of attentional selection: Temporally modulated priority tags , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[33]  S. Yantis,et al.  Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: voluntary versus automatic allocation. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[34]  Raymond Klein,et al.  Inhibitory tagging system facilitates visual search , 1988, Nature.

[35]  Z W Pylyshyn,et al.  Tracking multiple independent targets: evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. , 1988, Spatial vision.

[36]  S. Yantis,et al.  Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: evidence from visual search. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[37]  M. Posner,et al.  Components of visual orienting , 1984 .

[38]  D. Kahneman,et al.  The cost of visual filtering. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[39]  B. Bergum,et al.  Attention and performance IX , 1982 .

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

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