Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-05-2010 | Original article

Interference from familiar natural distractors is not eliminated by high perceptual load

Auteurs: Chunhong He, Antao Chen

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 3/2010

Abstract

A crucial prediction of perceptual load theory is that high perceptual load can eliminate interference from distractors. However, Lavie et al. (Psychol Sci 14:510–515, 2003) found that high perceptual load did not eliminate interference when the distractor was a face. The current experiments examined the interaction between familiarity and perceptual load in modulating interference in a name search task. The data reveal that high perceptual load eliminated the interference effect for unfamiliar distractors that were faces or objects, but did not eliminate the interference for familiar distractors that were faces or objects. Based on these results, we proposed that the processing of familiar and natural stimuli may be immune to the effect of perceptual load.

vorige artikel Switching attention between modalities: further evidence for visual dominance

volgende artikel Spatial Stroop and spatial orienting: the role of onset versus offset cues

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Bahrami, B., Carmel, D., Walsh, V., Rees, G., & Lavie, N. (2008). Unconscious orientation processing depends on perceptual load. Journal of Vision, 8, 10–12.CrossRef

Baldo, J. V., Shimamura, A. P., & Prinzmetal, W. (1998). Mapping symbols to response modalities: Interference effects on Stroop-like tasks. Perception and Psychophysics, 60, 427–437.PubMed

Brand-D’Abrescia, M., & Lavie, N. (2007). Distractor effects during processing of words under load. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14(6), 1153–1157.PubMed

Cartwright-Finch, U., & Lavie, N. (2007). The role of perceptual load in inattentional blindness. Cognition, 102, 321–340.CrossRefPubMed

Cohen, L., & Dehaene, S. (2004). Specialization within the ventral stream: The case for the visual word form area. Neuroimage, 22, 466–476.CrossRefPubMed

Cohen, L., Martinaud, O., Lemer, C., Lehéricy, S., Samson, Y., Obadia, M., et al. (2003). Visual word recognition in the left and right hemispheres: Anatomical and functional correlates of peripheral alexias. Cerebral Cortex, 13, 1313–1333.CrossRefPubMed

Eltiti, S., Wallace, D., & Fox, E. (2005). Selective target processing: Perceptual load or distractor salience? Perception and Psychophysics, 67, 876–885.PubMed

Fang, F., & He, S. (2005). Cortical responses to invisible objects in the human dorsal and ventral pathways. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 1380–1385.CrossRefPubMed

Forster, S., & Lavie, N. (2007). High perceptual load makes everybody equal: Eliminating individual differences in distractibility with load. Psychological Science, 18, 377–381.CrossRefPubMed

Forster, S., & Lavie, N. (2008). Failures to ignore entirely irrelevant distractors: The role of load. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14, 73–83.CrossRefPubMed

Goodale, M. A., & Milner, A. D. (1992). Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends in Neurosciences, 15, 20–25.CrossRefPubMed

Goodale, M. A., Milner, A. D., Jakobson, L. S., & Carey, D. P. (1991). A neurological dissociation between perceiving objects and grasping them. Nature, 349, 154–156.CrossRefPubMed

Hommel, B., & Colzato, L. S. (2009). When an object is more than a binding of its features: Evidence for two mechanisms of visual feature integration. Visual Cognition, 17, 120–140.CrossRef

James, T. W., Culham, J., Humphrey, G. K., Milner, A. D., & Goodale, M. A. (2003). Ventral occipital lesions impair object recognition but not object-directed grasping: An fMRI study. Brain, 126, 2463–2475.CrossRefPubMed

Johnson, D. N., McGrath, A., & McNeil, C. (2002). Cuing interacts with perceptual load in visual search. Psychological Science, 13, 284–287.CrossRefPubMed

Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., & Gibbs, B. J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 175–219.CrossRefPubMed

Lavie, N. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 451–468.CrossRefPubMed

Lavie, N. (2005). Distracted and confused?: Selective attention under load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(2), 75–82.CrossRefPubMed

Lavie, N. (2006). The role of perceptual load in visual awareness. Brain Research, 1080, 91–100.CrossRefPubMed

Lavie, N., & Cox, S. (1997). On the efficiency of attentional selection: Efficient visual search results in inefficient rejection of distraction. Psychological Science, 8, 395–398.CrossRef

Lavie, N., & de Fockert, J. W. (2003). Contrasting effects of sensory limits and capacity limits in visual selective attention. Perception and Psychophysics, 65, 202–212.PubMed

Lavie, N., & Fox, E. (2000). The role of perceptual load in negative priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1038–1052.CrossRefPubMed

Lavie, N., Hirst, A., de Fockert, J. W., & Viding, E. (2004). Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 339–354.CrossRef

Lavie, N., Ro, T., & Russell, C. (2003). The role of perceptual load in processing distractor faces. Psychological Science, 14, 510–515.CrossRefPubMed

Lavie, N., & Robertson, I. H. (2001). The role of perceptual load in neglect: Rejection of ipsilesional distractors is facilitated with higher central load. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13, 867–876.CrossRefPubMed

Lavie, N., & Tsal, Y. (1994). Perceptual load as a major determinant of the locus of selection in visual attention. Perception and Psychophysics, 56, 183–197.PubMed

Maurer, U., Brem, S., Bucher, K., & Brandeis, D. (2005). Emerging neurophysiological specialization for letter strings. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 1532–1552.CrossRefPubMed

Muggleton, N., Lamb, R., Walsh, V., & Lavie, N. (2008). Perceptual load modulates visual cortex excitability to magnetic stimulation. Journal of Neurophysiology, 100, 516–519.CrossRefPubMed

Paquet, L. (2001). Eliminating flanker effects and negative priming in the flankers task: Evidence for early selection. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 8, 301–306.PubMed

Paquet, L., & Craig, G. L. (1997). Evidence for selective target processing with a low perceptual load flankers task. Memory and Cognition, 25, 182–189.

Pylyshyn, Z., Burkell, J., Fisher, B., Sears, C., Schmidt, W., & Trick, L. (1994). Multiple parallel access in visual attention. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 260–283.PubMed

Wei, P., & Zhou, X. (2006). Processing multidimensional objects under different perceptual loads: The priority of bottom-up perceptual saliency. Brain Research, 1114, 113–124.CrossRefPubMed

Yantis, S., & Jones, E. (1991). Mechanisms of attentional selection: Temporally modulated priority tags. Perception and Psychophysics, 50, 166–178.PubMed

Titel: Interference from familiar natural distractors is not eliminated by high perceptual load
Auteurs: Chunhong He
Antao Chen
Publicatiedatum: 01-05-2010
Uitgeverij: Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 3/2010
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-009-0252-0

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2010

Feature integration and spatial attention: common processes for endogenous and exogenous orienting

Corresponding delay-dependent biases in spatial language and spatial memory

Compatibility between stimulated eye, target location and response location

Spatial Stroop and spatial orienting: the role of onset versus offset cues

RT patterns and chunks in SRT tasks: a reply to Jiménez (2008)

Is there a structural limit to ‘branch’ recursively between more than two tasks?