Four pop-out search experiments investigated whether dimension-based visual attention is top-down modulable. Observers searched for singleton feature targets defined, variably across trials, by a color or an orientation difference to nontargets. Observers were precued to the most probable target-defining dimension (e.g., by the word color) or feature (red) on a given trial. Results revealed expedited reaction times (RTs) for valid-dimension targets relative to neutral-cue conditions, and slowed RTs for invalid-dimension targets. Cue information as to precise target feature yielded some extra effect only for color targets. The dimensional cuing significantly reduced, but did not abolish, the dimension-specific influence of the previous target on detection of the current target (same-dimension RT < different-dimension RT). These findings confirm that top-down dimensional set modulates stimulus-driven dimension processes in the detection of pop-out signals. ((c) 2003 APA, all rights reserved)

Three experiments examined whether salient color singleton distractors automatically interfere with the detection singleton form targets in visual search (e.g., J. Theeuwes, 1992), or whether the degree of interference is top-down modulable. In Experiments 1 and 2, observers started with a pure block of trials, which contained either never a distractor or always a distractor (0% or 100% distractors)--varying the opportunity to learn distractor suppression. In the subsequent trial blocks, the proportion of distractors was systematically varied (within-subjects factor in Experiment 1, between-subjects factor in Experiment 2)--varying the incentive to use distractor suppression. In Experiment 3, observers started with 100% distractors in the first block and were presented with "rare" color or luminance distractors, in addition to "frequent" color distractors, in the second block. The results revealed distractor interference to vary as a function of both the initial experience with distractors and the incentive to suppress them: the interference was larger without relevant practice and with a lesser incentive to apply suppression (Experiments 1-3). This set of findings suggests that distractor interference is top-down modulable.

Three visual search experiments investigated redundancy gains for single and dual odd-one-out feature targets that differed from distractors in orientation, color, or both. In Experiment 1, redundant-target displays contained (a) a single target defined in 2 dimensions, (b) dual targets each defined in a different dimension, or (c) dual targets both defined in the same dimension. The redundancy gains, relative to single nonredundant targets, decreased from the first condition on, with violations of J. Miller's (1982) race model inequality (RMI) manifested only in the first 2 conditions. Experiment 2 systematically varied the spatial separation between dual targets each defined in a different dimension. Violations of the RMI were evident only when the 2 targets occupied nearby locations. Experiment 3 provided evidence of RMI violations by dimensionally redundant targets at both precued (likely) and noncued (unlikely) display locations. Taken together, these results suggest that there is coactivation of a common mechanism by target signals in different dimensions (not by signals in the same dimension), that the coactivation effects are spatially specific, and that the coactivated mechanisms are located at a preattentive, perceptual stage of processing.

In two visual search experiments, the detection of singleton feature targets redundantly defined on multiple dimensions was investigated. Targets differed from the distractors in orientation, color, or both (redundant targets). In Experiment 1, the various target types were presented either in separate blocks or in random order within blocks. Reaction times to redundant targets significantly violated the race model inequality (Miller, 1982), but only when there was constancy of the target-defining dimension(s) within trial blocks. In Experiment 2, there was dimensional variability within blocks. Consistent with Experiment 1, constancy of the target-defining dimension(s), but this time across successive trials (rather than within blocks), was critical for observing violations of the race model inequality. These results provide evidence for parallel-coactive processing of multiple dimensions, consistent with the dimension-weighting account of Müller, Heller, and Ziegler (1995).

No abstract

In singleton feature search for a form-defined target, the presentation of a task-irrelevant, but salient singleton color distractor is known to interfere with target detection [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]. The present study was designed to re-examine this effect, by presenting observers with a singleton form target (on each trial) that could be accompanied by a salient) singleton color distractor, with the proportion of distractor to no-distractor trials systematically varying across blocks of trials. In addition to RTs, eye movements were recorded in order to examine the mechanisms underlying the distractor interference effect. The results showed that singleton distractors did interfere with target detection only when they were presented on a relatively small (but not on a large) proportion of trials. Overall, the findings suggest that cross-dimensional interference is a covert attention effect, arising from the competition of the target with the distractor for attentional selection [Kumada, T., & Humphreys, G. W. (2002). Cross-dimensional interference and cross-trial inhibition. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 493-503], with the strength of the competition being modulated by observers' (top-down) incentive to suppress the distractor dimension.

The present study investigated the usability of whole and partial report of briefly displayed letter arrays as a diagnostic tool for the assessment of attentional functions. The tool is based on Bundesen's (1990, 1998, 2002; Bundesen et al., 2005) theory of visual attention (TVA), which assumes four separable attentional components: processing speed, working memory storage capacity, spatial distribution of attention, and top-down control. A number of studies (Duncan et al., 1999; Habekost & Bundesen, 2003; Peers et al., 2005) have already demonstrated the clinical relevance of these parameters. The present study was designed to examine whether (a) a shortened procedure bears sufficient accuracy and reliability, (b) whether the procedures reveal attentional constructs with clinical relevance, and (c) whether the mathematically independent parameters are also empirically independent. In a sample of 35 young healthy subjects, we found high intraparameter correlations between full-and short-length tests and sufficient internal consistencies as measured via a bootstrapping method. The clinical relevance of the TVA parameters was demonstrated by significant correlations with established clinical tests measuring similar constructs. The empirical independence of the four TVA parameters is suggested by nonsignificant or, in the case of processing speed and working memory storage capacity, only modest correlations between the parameter values.

Kristjánsson, Wang, and Nakayama (2002) demonstrated that visual search for conjunctively defined targets can be substantially expedited ("primed") when target and distractor features are repeated on consecutive trials. Two experiments were conducted to examine whether the search response time (RT) facilitation on target-present trials results from repetition of target-defining features, distractor features, or both. The experiments used a multiple conjunctive search paradigm (adapted from Kristjánsson et al., 2002), in which the target and distractor features were varied (i.e., repeated) independently of each other across successive trials. The RT facilitation was numerically largest when both target and distractor features were repeated, but not significantly larger than that when only distractor features were repeated. This indicates that cross-trial priming effects in conjunctive visual search result mainly from the repetition of distractor, rather than target, features.