Stimulus‐driven capture and contingent capture

Abstract

Whether or not certain physical events can capture attention has been one of the most debated issues in the study of attention. This discussion is concerned with how goal-directed and stimulus-driven processes interact in perception and cognition. On one extreme of the spectrum is the idea that attention capture is primarily stimulus driven and automatic. On the other end is the notion that attention capture is always contingent on the goals of the observer, and thus under top-down control. This review discusses the empirical evidence for each of these viewpoints and the theoretical consequences. In addition, there is a discussion of the issues that remain controversial within the debate between the two viewpoints. It is concluded that visual selection depends on the interaction between bottom-up and top-down processes with a special role for spatial attention as the top-down gatekeeper for attention capture. WIREs Cogn Sci 2010 1 872-881 For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.

The Influence of Onsets and Offsets on Saccade Programming

“…Remote offsets may result in a slower initiation of saccades towards the target only when the target is also defined by an offset. (2) Such a prediction would be consistent with the contingent capture hypothesis, which states that capture of attention is contingent on the top-down settings of the observer [eg when the observer is looking for a red target, only red distractors will have an effect (for a review of such effects see Theeuwes et al 2010)]. Following this hypothesis, onset distractors in our study had an effect because the target was defined as a stimulus onset.…”

Visual search

“…At this point, there is a clear inconsistency between Theeuwes' finding that search was only driven by bottom‐up factors and Folk and colleagues' findings that it was contingent on an observer's attentional set. There have been a number of attempts to reconcile these results; see Ref for a review. We interpret this apparent inconsistency in the following manner.…”

Attentional capture by deviant sounds: A noncontingent form of auditory distraction?

“…Such distractibility is classically explained in terms of attentional capture whereby unattended stimuli involuntarily direct attention away from goal-relevant information by virtue of their strong contrast with the environmental background. There is a debate in the visual attention literature regarding the source of this attentional capture phenomenon (see Theeuwes, Olivers, & Belopolsky, 2010).…”