Abstract
In two experiments, we examined why a singleton distractor has a stronger interfering effect in visual search when the target identity is uncertain. When participants searched for a shape, a color singleton distractor had a larger slowing effect in a mixed block, in which the target shape could change from trial to trial, than in a pure block, in which the target shape remained the same. Importantly, this increased singleton distractor effect could be traced back entirely to intertrial priming, since the increased costs occurred only on trials in which the target and the singleton distractor swapped identity (Experiment 1, allowing for priming between targets and singleton distractors) or on trials in which the target alone changed identity while the singleton distractor remained constant (Experiment 2, allowing for priming between targets only). This suggests that target uncertainty itself does not lead to strategic changes in the attentional selection of singletons. Instead, selection is affected by relatively automatic priming mechanisms that may be enhanced by competition for attention.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bacon, W. F., &Egeth, H. E. (1994). Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture.Perception & Psychophysics,5, 485–496.
Duncan, J., &Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity.Psychological Review,96, 433–458.
Folk, C., Remington, R. W., &Johnston, J. C. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control setting.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 1030–1044.
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.
Kumada, T. (2001). Feature-based control of attention: Evidence for two forms of dimension weighting.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 698–708.
Maljkovic, V., &Nakayama, K. (1994). Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features.Memory & Cognition,22, 657–672.
Maljkovic, V., &Nakayama, K. (2000). Priming of pop-out: III. A short-term implicit memory system beneficial for rapid target selection.Visual Cognition,7, 571–595.
Milliken, B., Joordens, S., Merikle, P. M., &Seiffert, A. E. (1998). Selective attention: A reevaluation of the implications of negative priming.Psychological Review,105, 203–229.
Mortier, K., Theeuwes, J., &Starreveld, P. (2005). Response selection modulates visual search within and across dimensions.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,31, 542–557.
Müller, H. J., Heller, D., &Ziegler, J. (1995). Visual search for singleton feature targets within and across feature dimensions.Perception & Psychophysics,57, 1–17.
Neill, W. T., Valdes, L. A., Terry, K. M., &Gorfein, D. S. (1992). Persistence of negative priming: II. Evidence for episodic trace retrieval.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 993–1000.
Olivers, C. N. L., &Humphreys, G. W. (2003). Attentional guidance by salient feature singletons depends on intertrial contingencies.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,29, 650–657.
Pashler, H. (1988). Cross-dimensional interaction and texture segregation.Perception & Psychophysics,43, 307–318.
Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders’ method. In W. G. Koster (Ed.),Attention and performance II (pp. 276–315). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Theeuwes, J. (1991). Cross-dimensional perceptual selectivity.Perception & Psychophysics,50, 184–193.
Theeuwes, J. (1992). Perceptual selectivity for color and form.Perception & Psychophysics,51, 599–606.
Theeuwes, J., Reimann, B., & Mortier, K. (in press). Visual search for featural singletons: No top-down modulation, only bottom-up priming.Visual Cognition.
Tipper, S. P. (1985). The negative priming effect: Inhibitory priming by ignored objects.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,37A, 571–590.
Tipper, S. P. (2001). Does negative priming reflect inhibitory mechanisms? A review and integration of conflicting views.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,54A, 321–343.
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
This research was funded by a grant from NWO (Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research), Grant 400-03-008 to J.T., and Grant 451-02-117 to C.N.L.O.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pinto, Y., Olivers, C.L. & Theeuwes, J. Target uncertainty does not lead to more distraction by singletons: Intertrial priming does. Perception & Psychophysics 67, 1354–1361 (2005). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193640
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193640