High spatial validity is not sufficient to elicit voluntary shifts of attention

Abstract

Previous research suggests that the use of valid symbolic cues is sufficient to elicit voluntary shifts of attention. The present study interpreted this previous research within a broader theoretical context which contends that observers will voluntarily use symbolic cues to orient their attention in space when the temporal costs of using the cues are perceived to be less than the temporal costs of searching without the aid of the cues. In this view, previous research has not addressed the sufficiency of valid symbolic cues, because the temporal cost of using the cues is usually incurred before the target display appears. To address this concern, 70%-valid spatial word cues were presented simultaneously with a search display. In addition, other research suggests that opposing cuedependent and cue-independent spatial biases may operate in these studies and alter standard measures of orienting. After identifying and controlling these opposing spatial biases, the results of two experiments showed that the word cues did not elicit voluntary shifts of attention when the search task was relatively easy but did when the search task was relatively difficult. Moreover, the findings also showed that voluntary use of the word cues changed over the course of the experiment when the task was difficult, presumably because the temporal cost of searching without the cue lessened as the task got easier with practice. Altogether, the present findings suggested that the factors underlying voluntary control are multifaceted and contextual, and that spatial validity alone is not sufficient to elicit voluntary shifts of attention. Keywords Spatial attention . Spatial cuing, Symbolic attention control . Voluntary attention controlSpatial symbols are often used to elicit voluntary shifts of attention in the laboratory, though these symbols may also elicit involuntary (or automated) shifts of attention (Friesen & Kingstone, 1998;Friesen, Ristic, & Kingstone, 2004;Gibson & Bryant, 2005;Ho & Spence, 2006;Hommel, Pratt, Colzato, & Godijn, 2001;Jonides, 1981;Leblanc & Jolicoeur, 2010;Pratt, Radulescu, Guo, & Hommel, 2010;Ristic, Friesen, & Kingstone, 2002;Ristic & Kingstone, 2006Tipples, 2002Tipples, , 2008. For the past 30 years, the primary tool used to study attentional shifts in response to such symbolic cues has been the spatial cuing paradigm (Posner, 1980;Posner, Snyder, & Davidson, 1980). In this paradigm, observers are shown visual displays and are required to detect, discriminate, or identify some target stimulus presented in their periphery while keeping their eyes fixated on a central location. To aid in their search for the target, a symbolic cue is often shown at fixation, which correctly identifies the location of the target on some trials (i.e., valid trials) but not on others (i.e., invalid trials). In most variations of the spatial cuing paradigm, there is only one target present in each display, accompanied by visually similar nontarget distractors. Under these conditions, observers can choose to use the cue to l...

Evaluating Amazon’s Mechanical Turk for psychological research on the symbolic control of attention

“…However, as mentioned, a growing body of evidence suggests that measurement of observers' performance in the spatial cuing paradigm is sensitive to a variety of factors that are orthogonal to the task itself (see, e.g., Nomura, Katahata, & Hashiya, 2005;Pauszek & Gibson, 2016). As a result, is it necessary to consider the possibility that the effects of interest in the present study may not replicate due to some unforeseen confound associated with collecting data remotely over the Internet.…”

“…1a, Pauszek and Gibson (2016) provided evidence that an underlying left/right advantage operates in the spatial cuing paradigm, even when observers are not provided with a spatial cue. Moreover, the authors reported that the effect operates in an equipotent fashion along the horizontal axis (i.e., no differences were found between RTs or percent error rates when the target appeared at the left or right locations) and that it has the capacity to bias commonly used measures of cue comprehension if left uncontrolled (see Pauszek & Gibson, 2016, for a broader discussion of this issue). Thus, establishing the replicability of the left/right advantage when remotely collecting data online was a necessary first step so that it can be controlled for in all future endeavors.…”

“…This was necessary because contemporary research has reported that, when they are left uncontrolled, these effects have the capacity to bias commonly used measures of cue comprehension that rely on comparisons between the mean correct response times (RTs) on cued and uncued trials (i.e., costs-plus-benefits; see Pauszek & Gibson, 2016;Posner, 1980;Posner, Snyder, & Davidson, 1980). If unaccounted for, this measurement bias can lead to potentially false inferences about the nature of attention control, which will clearly be an important issue to consider in virtually all future spatial cuing studies (see Pauszek & Gibson, 2016, for a broader discussion of this issue). Therefore, in the present study we aimed to provide a crucial first step toward opening new avenues for efficiently and reliably investigating the symbolic control of attention and, more generally, visual attention as a whole.…”

“…The left/right advantage is thought to reflect the asymmetrical organization of the human visual system (Abrams, Nizam, & Carrasco, 2012;Carrasco, 2014;Kobayashi & Kohshima, 1997, 2001aNomura, Katahata, & Hashiya, 2005;Ossandón, Onat, & König, 2014;Pauszek & Gibson, 2016; see also Robertson, 2004, for a review). In the context of the spatial cuing paradigm, the left/right advantage manifests as faster RTs due to more efficient target processing when the target appears at the left or right location, relative to when the target appears at the above or below location.…”

“…1a). This task was intended to replicate Experiment 1 of Pauszek and Gibson's (2016) study, which reported a left/right advantage. In Block w and Block a , workers were required to discriminate the color (red or green) of a target circle specified by either a spatial word cue (see Fig.…”