Contingent capture for onsets and offsets: attentional set for perceptual transients

Choosing attentional control settings in a dynamically changing environment

Goal-directed attentional control supports efficient visual search by prioritizing relevant stimuli in the environment. Previous research has shown that goal-directed control can be configured in many ways, and often multiple control settings can be used to achieve the same goal. However, little is known about how control settings are selected. We explored the extent to which the configuration of goal-directed control is driven by performance maximization (optimally configuring settings to maximize speed and accuracy) and effort minimization (selecting the least effortful settings). We used a new paradigm, adaptive choice visual search, which allows participants to choose one of two available targets (a red or a blue square) on each trial. Distractor colors vary predictively across trials, such that the optimal target switches back and forth throughout the experiment. Results (N = 43) show that participants chose the optimal target most often, updating to the new target when the environment changed, supporting performance maximization. However, individuals were sluggish to update to the optimal color, consistent with effort minimization. Additionally, we found a surprisingly high rate of nonoptimal choices and switching between targets, which could not be explained by either factor. Analysis of participants' self-reported search strategy revealed substantial individual differences in the control strategies used. In sum, the adaptive choice visual search enables a fresh approach to studying goal-directed control. The results contribute new evidence that control is partly determined by both performance maximization and effort minimization, as well as at least one additional factor, which we speculate to include novelty seeking.

Detection of object onsets and offsets: Does the primacy of onset persist even with bias for detecting offset?

Onset primacy is a robust visual phenomenon in which appearance of new objects (onsets) in a scene more effectively captures observers' attention compared with disappearance of previously viewed objects (offsets). We hypothesized that the human attentional system is programmed by default to prioritize the processing of onsets, because quick detection of them is advantageous in most situations. However, the attentional priority may be able to flexibly adapt to the detection of object offsets depending on observers' behavioral goals. To test these hypotheses, two experiments were conducted in which participants were biased toward finding offset of an existing object through top-down and bottom-up manipulations. Results showed that although onset primacy was reduced to some degree under strong offset bias, in general participants continued to detect onsets efficiently. These findings did not eliminate the possibility of attentional flexibility, but they do demonstrate the robustness of onset primacy, suggesting that environmental demands or motivational factors would need to be sufficiently strong for people to switch to an adaptive attentional mode.

Can attentional control settings be maintained for two color-location conjunctions? Evidence from an RSVP task

Previous investigations of the ability to maintain separate attentional control settings for different spatial locations have relied principally on a go/no-go spatial-cueing paradigm. The results have suggested that control of attention is accomplished only late in processing. However, the go/no-go task does not provide strong incentives to withhold attention from irrelevant color-location conjunctions. We used a modified version of the task in which failing to adopt multiple control settings would be detrimental to performance. Two RSVP streams of colored letters appeared to the left and right of fixation. Participants searched for targets that were a conjunction of color and location, so that the target color for one stream acted as a distractor when presented in the opposite stream. Distractors that did not match the target conjunctions nevertheless captured attention and interfered with performance. This was the case even when the target conjunctions were previewed early in the trial prior to the target (Exp. 2). However, distractor interference was reduced when the upcoming distractor was previewed early on in the trial (Exp. 3). Attentional selection of targets by color-location conjunctions may be effective if facilitative attentional sets are accompanied by the top-down inhibition of irrelevant items.

Capturing attention is not that simple: different mechanisms for stimulus-driven and contingent capture

Attentional orienting can be involuntarily directed to task-irrelevant stimuli, but it remains unsolved whether such attentional capture is contingent on top-down settings or could be purely stimulus-driven. We propose that attentional capture depends on the stimulus property because transient and static features are processed differently; thus, they might be modulated differently by top-down controls. To test this hybrid account, we adopted a spatial cuing paradigm in which a noninformative onset or color cue preceded an onset or color target with various stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs). Results showed that the onset cue captured attention regardless of target type at short-but not long-SOAs. In contrast, the color cue captured attention at short and long SOAs, but only with a color target. The overall pattern of results corroborates our hypothesis, suggesting that different mechanisms are at work for stimulus-driven capture (by onset) and contingent capture (by color). Stimulus-driven capture elicits reflexive involuntary orienting, and contingent capture elicits voluntary feature-based enhancement.

Breaking through the attentional window: capture by abrupt onsets versus color singletons

Theeuwes (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 11:65-70, 2004) proposed that stimulus-driven capture occurs primarily for salient stimuli that fall within the observer's attentional window, such as when performing a parallel search. This proposal, which is supported by some studies, can explain many seemingly discrepant results in the literature. The present study tested this proposal using a modified precuing paradigm. Search mode was manipulated via target-distractor similarity in color space. In the parallel search condition, the orange target "popped out" from a set of distantly colored distractors (blue and green). In the serial search condition, the orange target was more difficult to find amongst a set of similarly colored distractors (yellow and red). In Experiments 1 and 2, cue validity effects for irrelevant-color singleton cues were greater under parallel than under serial search, at least partially replicating previous studies favoring the attentional-window account (e.g., Belopolsky, Zwaan, Theeuwes, & Kramer, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 14:934-938, 2007). We found the opposite pattern, however, for capture by abrupt onsets (Experiments 3 and 4), in which case capture effects were actually greater under serial search. In sum, parallel search appears to facilitate capture by color singletons, yet to inhibit capture by abrupt onsets.

Non-transient luminance changes do not capture attention

The processing of luminance change is a ubiquitous feature of the human visual system and provides the basis for the rapid orienting of attention to potentially important events (e.g., motion onset, object onset). However, despite its importance for attentional capture, it is not known whether a luminance change attracts attention solely because of its status as a sensory transient or can attract attention at a relatively high cognitive level. In a series of six experiments, we presented visual displays in which a single object underwent a luminance change that was either visible or obscured by a mask. A target then appeared either at the change location or elsewhere. The results showed that the luminance change attracted attention only in the visible condition. This was even observed with the largest change we could generate (> 75 cd/m(2)). These data suggest that the importance of a luminance change is only in its status as a low-level sensory transient.

Attentional capture by object appearance and disappearance

In two experiments we examined whether the appearance of a new object has attentional priority over disappearance. Previous failures to show differences are possibly due to onsets and offsets always being presented as a sole visual transient. Rather than presenting each alone, we presented onset and offset singletons simultaneously with a display-wide luminance transient in order to force each to compete with other visual events. Results from Experiment 1 showed that targets associated with onsets accrued a reaction time benefit whilst targets associated with offsets did not. Experiment 2 showed that onsets attracted attention even when observers were attentionally set to look for offset. By contrast, offsets needed a relevant attentional set in order to attract attention. We argue that the appearance of an object has attentional priority over disappearance.

Displaywide visual features associated with a search display’s appearance can mediate attentional capture

Whether or not the capture of visual attention is driven solely by the salience of an attention-capturing stimulus or mediated by top-down control has been a point of contention since Folk, Remington, and Johnston (1992) introduced their contingent involuntary orienting hypothesis, which states that the capture of attention by a salient stimulus depends on its relevance to a feature distinguishing the target from nontargets. Gibson and Kelsey (1998) extended Folk et al.'s (1992) hypothesis by demonstrating that features associated with the appearance of the target display also mediate capture. Although similar to Folk et al. (1992), Gibson and Kelsey's displaywide contingent orienting hypothesis makes it difficult to demonstrate stimulus-driven capture, because an observer must always use some perceptible feature as a signal of the target display's appearance; hence, such features could always be mediating capture. The present article reviews and applies the logic of Gibson and Kelsey's and Folk et al.'s (1992) hypotheses to experiments from the attentional capture literature, and assesses whether previously reported capture effects were mediated by top-down attentional control. It concludes that these capture effects were not stimulus-driven.

Multisensory synesthetic interactions in the speeded classification of visual size

In the present study, we attempted to demonstrate a synesthetic relationship between auditory frequency and visual size. In Experiment 1, participants performed a speeded visual size discrimination task in which they had to judge whether a variable-sized disk was bigger or smaller than a standard reference disk. A task-irrelevant sound that was either synesthetically congruent with the relative size of the disk (e.g., a low-frequency sound presented with a bigger disk) or synesthetically incongruent with it (e.g., a low-frequency sound presented with a smaller disk) was sometimes presented together with the variable disk. Reaction times were shorter in the synesthetically congruent condition than in the incongruent condition. Verbal labeling and semantic mediation interpretations of this interaction were explored in Experiment 2, in which high- and low-frequency sounds were presented in separate blocks of trials, and in Experiment 3, in which the tones were replaced by the spoken words "high" and "low." Response priming/bias explanations were ruled out in Experiment 4, in which a synesthetic congruency effect was still reported even when participants made same-versus-different discrimination responses regarding the relative sizes of the two disks. Taken together, these results provide the first empirical demonstration that the relative frequency of an irrelevant sound can influence the speed with which participants judge the size of visual stimuli when the sound varies on a trial-by-trial basis along a synesthetically compatible dimension. The possible cognitive bases for this synesthetic association are also discussed.

Capturing focused attention

When attention is diffuse, as in a visual search task, an abrupt onset almost invariably succeeds in capturing attention. But if attention had been cued in advance to a different location, the same onset may then fail to capture attention (Theeuwes, 1991; Yantis and Jonides, 1990). In previous demonstrations, the onset appeared frequently. This may have diminished the onset's novelty, which in turn could have affected its potency in capturing attention. The question we asked was whether preserving the onset's novelty could enhance its capacity in capturing attention, even when attention had been prioritized elsewhere. As in Theeuwes's (1991) study, observers were cued to the target location with a 100%-predictive central arrow cue. The frequency with which visual transients were introduced was varied across experiments. When the onset stimulus appeared frequently (Experiment 1), it indeed failed to capture attention. But when its appearance was relatively infrequent (Experiment 2), capture effects were clearly observed. In Experiment 3, the target appeared in one location throughout the experiment. This would have improved target localization, but an infrequently appearing onset stimulus still successfully captured attention.

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.

Prioritization of new objects in real-world scenes: evidence from eye movements

The authors examined the prioritization of abruptly appearing objects in real-world scenes by measuring the eyes' propensity to be directed to the new object. New objects were fixated more often than chance whether they appeared during fixations (transient onsets) or saccades (nontransient onsets). However, onsets that appeared during fixations were fixated sooner and more often than those coincident with saccades. Prioritization of onsets during saccades, but not fixations, were affected by manipulations of memory: Reducing scene viewing time prior to the onset eliminated prioritization, whereas prior study of the scenes increased prioritization. Transient objects draw attention quickly and do not depend on memory, but without a transient signal, new objects are prioritized over several saccades as memory is used to explicitly identify the change. These effects were not modulated by observers' expectations concerning the appearance of new objects, suggesting the prioritization of a transient is automatic and that memory-guided prioritization is implicit.

Oculomotor consequences of abrupt object onsets and offsets: onsets dominate oculomotor capture

Previous research has shown that the appearance of an object (onset) and the disappearance of an object (offset) have the ability to influence the allocation of covert attention. To determine whether both onsets and offsets have the ability to influence eye movements, a series of experiments was conducted in which participants had to make goal-directed eye movements to a color singleton target in the presence of an irrelevant onset/offset. In accord with previous research, onsets had the ability to capture the eyes. The offset of an object demonstrated little or no ability to interrupt goal-directed eye movements to the target. Two experiments in which the effects of onsets and offsets on covert attention were examined suggest that offsets do not capture the eyes, because they have a lesser ability to capture covert attention than do onsets. A number of other studies that have shown strong effects of offsets on attention have used offsets that were uncorrelated with target position (i.e., nonpredictive), whereas we used onsets and offsets that never served as targets (i.e., antipredictive). The present results are consistent with a new-object theory of attentional capture in which onsets receive attentional priority over other types of changes in the visual environment.

Selective target processing: Perceptual load or distractor salience?

Perceptual load theory (Lavie, 1995) states that participants cannot engage in focused attention when shown displays containing a low perceptual load, because attentional resources are not exhausted, whereas in high-load displays attention is always focused, because attentional resources are exhausted. An alternative "salience" hypothesis holds that the salience of distractors and not perceptual load per se determines selective attention. Three experiments were conducted to investigate the influence that target and distractor onsets and offsets have on selective processing in a standard interference task. Perceptual load theory predicts that, regardless of target or distractor presentation (onset or offset), interference from ignored distractors should occur in low-load displays only. In contrast, the salience hypothesis predicts that interference should occur when the distractor appears as an onset and would occur for distractor offsets only when the target was also an offset. Interference may even occur in highload displays if the distractor is more salient. The results supported the salience hypothesis.

Visual salience in the change detection paradigm: the special role of object onset

The relative efficacy with which appearance of a new object orients visual attention was investigated. At issue is whether the visual system treats onset as being of particular importance or only 1 of a number of stimulus events equally likely to summon attention. Using the 1-shot change detection paradigm, the authors compared detectability of new objects with changes occurring at already present objects--luminance change, color change, and object offset. Results showed that appearance of a new object was less susceptible to change blindness than changes that old objects could undergo. The authors also investigated whether it is onset per se that leads to enhanced detectability or onset of an object representation. Results showed that the onset advantage was eliminated for onsets that did not correspond with the appearance of a new object. These findings suggest that the visual system is particularly sensitive to the onset of a new object.

Aging and Visual Masking: Sensory and Attentional Factors

Visual tasks can yield quantitatively similar patterns of performance that reflect different underlying mechanisms in younger and older observers. In 3 experiments, we used the visual masking task of J. T. Enns and V. Di Lollo (1997) to examine 2 of these mechanisms: stimulus contrast and attention. Performance appeared to be equivalent for younger and older observers in some circumstances, although manipulation of contrast and attention suggested that older observers may use focal attention to enhance the perceptual clarity of the target. For older observers, impoverished visual representations may more readily be eliminated by manipulation of attention or by the presence of a mask, indicating that both attention and stimulus quality are important influences on performance.

Attentional capture by auto- and allo-cues

In a host of studies, the ability of various types of cues to capture attention has been examined. This article reviews a number of these studies by organizing them into a classification scheme based on the relationship between the putative attention-capturing item (the cue) and the item used to assess the distribution of attention (the probe). The second dimension of this taxonomy divides paradigms of attentional capture into those in which capture is indexed by performance benefits and those in which capture is indexed by performance costs. The relative methodological merits and disadvantages of the paradigms that occupy each of the cells of the resulting two-by-two matrix are discussed. A final section offers a new interpretation of the finding that dynamic cues capture attention.

Visual marking: a convergence of goal- and stimulus-driven processes during visual search

Watson and Humphreys (1997) proposed that visual marking is a goal-directed process that enhances visual search through the inhibition of old objects. In addition to the standard marking case with targets at new locations, included in Experiment 1 was a set of trials with targets always at old locations, as well as a set of trials with targets varying between new and old locations. The participants' performance when detecting the target at old locations was equivalent to their performance in the full-baseline condition when they knew the target would be at old locations, and was worse when the target appeared at old locations on 50% of the trials. Marking was observed when the target appeared at new locations. In Experiment 2, an offset paradigm was used to eliminate the influence of the salient abrupt-onset feature of the new objects. No significant benefits were found for targets at new locations in the absence of onsets at new locations. The results suggest that visual marking may be an attentional selection mechanism that significantly benefits visual search when (1) the observer has an appropriate search goal, (2) the goal necessitates inhibition of old objects, and (3) the new objects include a salient perceptual feature.

Contingent visual marking by transients

Preview search is a phenomenon in which a set of new items can be searched with seemingly no interference from items already present in the display. The preview effect has been shown to occur only when the presentation of the new items is accompanied by a luminance change (Donk & Theeuwes, 2001). In a series of experiments, we extend the type of transients that can lead to a preview benefit to offsets and motion, and confirm Donk and Theeuwes's finding that equiluminant color changes do not lead to a preview effect. Like Donk and Theeuwes, we find that preview search does not occur when only the old items undergo a transient change, suggesting that the processes responsible for preview search are triggered when the new items undergo a change detectable by the magnocellular system. In addition, we find that irrelevant transients interfere with preview search only when they match the current attentional set (e.g., luminance change or motion). Results suggest that preview search is not the automatic capture of attention by transients, but rather is contingent on top-down control settings.

When something old becomes something new: spatiotemporal object continuity and attentional capture

This article examines the possibility that the visal system treats dynamic cues a instances of new perceptual objects undersome circumstances. Using the contingent capture paradigm (C. L. Folk, R. W. Remington, & J. C. Johnston, 1992), the author compared luminance change cues of different magnitude for their ability to capture attention when participants were set for new objects. Wheras small luminance changes failed to produce attentional capture, large luminance changs indeed captured attention, suggesting that they were treated as compatible with the participants' attentional set for new objects. It is argued that sufficiently large luminance transients led to a disurption of spatiotemporal object continuity and precipitated the emergence of a new perceptual object.

The effect of smoking on sensory and attentional masking

This study examined the influence of smoking on low-level sensory and higher level visual cognitive abilities. Three groups (nonsmokers, deprived smokers, and nondeprived smokers) of 22 observers were tested using a visual target discrimination task. To assess sensory and visual cognitive differences, a masking task developed by Enns and Di Lollo (1997) was used. In the task, the target was masked by either a contour mask (contour masking) or an object mask (attentional masking by object substitution). The strongest masking effects were found in the group of nondeprived smokers, for both sensory and attentional masking. This pattern of results as well as results in the deprived smokers indicated changes in transient visual processing channels due to the acute actions of nicotine, not mediated by withdrawal relief.

Attentional capture with various distractor and target types

Effects of nonpredictive distractors that involved changes in luminance, size, or shape were examined in three experiments. In Experiment 1, with two types of distractors (onsets and offsets), accuracy was better on trials when the distractor was near the location of either an offset or an onset target than on trials when the distractor was in a different location from that of the target, demonstrating attentional capture. Capture occurred both when the type of target (onset or offset) was blocked and therefore predictable and also when the type of target was mixed within blocks and therefore not predictable. Further experiments indicated that distractors captured attention even when the change to distractor did not create a new perceptual object. Neither a singleton-detection mode, nor a contingent involuntary orienting hypothesis, nor creation of a new object seems to explain all of these data adequately. Rather, capture may depend on a number of factors in the task.

Attention and performance

Recent progress in the study of attention and performance is discussed, focusing on the nature of attentional control and the effects of practice. Generally speaking, the effects of mental set are proving more pervasive than was previously suspected, whereas automaticity is proving less robust. Stimulus attributes (e.g. onsets, transients) thought to have a "wired-in" ability to capture attention automatically have been shown to capture attention only as a consequence of voluntarily adopted task sets. Recent research suggests that practice does not have as dramatic effects as is commonly believed. While it may turn out that some mental operations are automatized in the strongest sense, this may be uncommon. Recent work on task switching is also described; optimal engagement in a task set is proving to be intimately tied to learning operations triggered by the actual performance of a new task, not merely the anticipation of such performance.