Abstract
There is no consensus as to what information guides search for a singleton target. Does the most salient display element capture attention, regardless of the observer’s attentional set? Do observers adopt a default salience-based search mode? Does knowledge of the target’s defining featural property (when available) affect search? Finally, can intertrial contingencies account for the disparate results in the literature? We investigated search for a shape singleton when (1) the target and nontarget shapes switched unpredictably from trial to trial, (2) the target feature remained fixed, and (3) the target was a singleton on only one third of the trials. We examined overall reaction times, search slopes, errors, and the magnitude of the slowing caused by a cross-dimensional singleton distractor. Our results argue against the idea that search is guided solely by stimulus-driven factors or that subjects adopt asingleton detection mode that is blind to feature information. They show also that intertrial contingencies, although potent, cannot account for the variety of results in the literature.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bacon, W. F., &Egeth, H. E. (1994). Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture.Perception & Psychophysics,55, 485–496.
Bravo, M. J., &Nakayama, K. (1992). The role of attention in different visual-search tasks.Perception & Psychophysics,51, 465–472.
Chun, M. M., &Jiang, Y. (1998). Contextual cueing: Implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention.Cognitive Psychology,36, 28–71.
DeSchepper, B., &Treisman, A. (1996). Visual memory for novel shapes: Implicit coding without attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,22, 27–47.
Duncan, J., &Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity.Psychological Review,96, 433–458.
Egeth, H. E., Jonides, J., &Wall, S. (1972). Parallel processing of multielement displays.Cognitive Psychology,3, 674–698.
Folk, C. L., Leber A. B., &Egeth, H. E. (2002). Made you blink! Contingent attentional capture produces a spatial blink.Perception & Psychophysics,64, 741–753.
Folk, C. L., &Remington, R. [W.] (1998). Selectivity in distraction by irrelevant featural singletons: Evidence for two forms of attentional capture.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 847–858.
Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., &Johnston, J. C. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 1030–1044.
Goolsby, B. A., &Suzuki, S. (2001). Understanding priming of colorsingleton search: Roles of attention at encoding and “retrieval”.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 929–944.
Hillstrom, A. P. (2000). Repetition effects in visual search.Perception & Psychophysics,62, 800–817.
Hodsoll, J., &Humphreys, G. W. (2001). Driving attention with the top down: The relative contribution of target templates to the linear separability effect in the size dimension.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 918–926.
Kim, M.-S., &Cave, K. R. (1999). Top-down and bottom-up attentional control: On the nature of interference from a salient distractor.Perception & Psychophysics,61, 1009–1023.
Lamy, D., Bar-Anan, Y., Egeth, H. E., &Carmel, T. (2006). Effects of top-down guidance and singleton priming on visual search.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,13, 287–293.
Lamy, D., &Egeth, H. E. (2003). Attentional capture in singletondetection and feature-search modes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,29, 1003–1020.
Lamy, D., Leber, A. B., &Egeth, H. E. (2004). Effects of bottom-up salience within feature-search mode.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,30, 1019–1031.
Lamy, D., &Tsal, Y. (1999). A salient distractor does not disrupt conjunction search.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,6, 93–98.
Lamy, D., Tsal, Y., &Egeth, H. E. (2003). Does a salient distractor capture attention early in processing?Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,10, 621–629.
Leber, A. B., & Egeth, H. E. (2003, November).It’s under control: Top down search strategies do override attentional capture. Paper presented at the annual Object Perception, Attention, and Memory (OPAM) workshop, Vancouver.
Leber, A. B., &Egeth, H. E. (2006). Attention on autopilot: Past experience and attentional set.Visual Cognition,14, 565–583.
Maljkovic, V., &Nakayama, K. (1994). Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features.Memory & Cognition,22, 657–672.
Maljkovic, V., &Nakayama, K. (1996). Priming of pop-out: II. The role of position.Perception & Psychophysics,58, 977–991.
Maljkovic, V., &Nakayama, K. (2000). Priming of popout: III. A short-term implicit memory system beneficial for rapid target selection.Visual Cognition,7, 571–595.
McPeek, R. M., Maljkovic, V., &Nakayama, K. (1999). Saccades require focal attention and are facilitated by a short-term memory system.Vision Research,39, 1555–1566.
Müller, H. J., Heller, D., &Ziegler, J. (1995). Visual search for singleton feature targets within and across feature dimensions.Perception & Psychophysics,57, 1–17.
Pashler, H. (1988). Cross-dimensional interaction and texture segregation.Perception & Psychophysics,43, 307–318.
Pinto, Y., Olivers, C. N. L., &Theeuwes, J. (2005). Target uncertainty does not lead to more distraction by singletons: Intertrial priming does.Perception & Psychophysics,67, 1354–1361.
Rauschenberger, R. (2003). Attentional capture by auto- and allocues.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,10, 814–842.
Ruz, M., &Lupiáñez, J. (2002). A review of attentional capture: On its automaticity and sensitivity to endogenous control.Psicológica,23, 283–309.
Shore, D. I., &Klein, R. M. (2000). On the manifestations of memory in visual search.Spatial Vision,14, 59–75.
Theeuwes, J. (1992). Perceptual selectivity for color and form.Perception & Psychophysics,51, 599–606.
Theeuwes, J. (2004). Top-down search strategies cannot override attentional capture.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,11, 65–70.
Theeuwes, J., Atchley, P., &Kramer, A. F. (2000). On the time course of top-down and bottom-up control of visual attention. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.),Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 105–124). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Todd, S., &Kramer, A. F. (1994). Attentional misguidance in visual search.Perception & Psychophysics,56, 198–210.
Wolfe, J. M., Butcher, S. J., Lee, C., &Hyle, M. (2003). Changing your mind: On the contributions of top-down and bottom-up guidance in visual search for feature singletons.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,29, 483–502.
Yantis, S., &Egeth, H. E. (1999). On the distinction between visual salience and stimulus-driven attentional capture.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,25, 661–676.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Support for this research was provided by Binational Science Foundation Grant 200267 to D.L. and H.E.E. and by Israel Science Foundation Grant 1382-04 to D.L.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lamy, D., Carmel, T., Egeth, H.E. et al. Effects of search mode and intertrial priming on singleton search. Perception & Psychophysics 68, 919–932 (2006). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193355
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193355