Templates for rejection: Configuring attention to ignore task-irrelevant features.

Abstract

Theories of attention are compatible with the idea that we can bias attention to avoid selecting objects that have known nontarget features. Although this may underlie several existing phenomena, the explicit guidance of attention away from known nontargets has yet to be demonstrated. Here we show that observers can use feature cues (i.e., color) to bias attention away from nontarget items during visual search. These negative cues were used to quickly instantiate a template for rejection that reliably facilitated search across the cue-to-search stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs), although negative cues were not as potent as cues that guide attention toward target features. Furthermore, by varying the search set size we show a template for rejection is increasingly effective in facilitating search as scene complexity increases. Our findings demonstrate that knowing what not to look for can be used to configure attention to avoid certain features, complimenting what is known about setting attention to select certain target features.

Lack of free choice reveals the cost of multiple-target search within and across feature dimensions

“…One piece of evidence for reactive suppression of distractors is provided by the distractor positivity (Pd), an event-related potential that occurs contralateral to a suppressed location (Hickey, Di Lollo, & McDonald, 2009). There is also evidence for proactive control of distractor suppression, as observers try to adopt an attentional set against distractor locations or distractor features (e.g., Arita, Carlisle, & Woodman, 2012;Awh, Matsukura, & Serences, 2003;Poole & Kane, 2009;Reeder, Olivers, & Pollmann, 2017). Our results extend these findings by demonstrating that observers can use available information not only to avoid attending unwanted stimuli, but also to facilitate the shift of attention toward stimuli that match a current task set.…”

Observers change their target template based on expected context

“…In Experiment 3a, we found that discrimination training with the target prior to search task eliminated the benefit of the context cue on search. Although distractor suppression may exist in other situations (Arita et al 2012;Moher et al, 2014), the preponderance of evidence in this study suggests that the context cues were not used for distractor suppression.…”

“…Recent studies have reported distractor suppression based on salient features (Arita, Carlisle & Woodman, 2012;Moher, Lakshmanan, Egeth & Ewen, 2014). To test whether our observers were using the context cues to inhibit the processing of the distractors, we repeated the experiment with the same three distractors and ten randomly varying targets.…”

Target templates: the precision of mental representations affects attentional guidance and decision-making in visual search

“…Top-down guidance is even strong enough to override attention capture by low-level salience (Chen & Zelinsky, 2006). In essence, top-down guidance works in two ways: it biases attention toward important features or regions, and it biases attention away from undesirable features (or objects that have already been inspected; Al-Aidroos et al, 2012; Arita, Carlisle, & Woodman 2012). It is unsurprising that successful models of visual search, such as Guided Search (Wolfe et al, 1989; Wolfe, 1994; Wolfe & Gancarz, 1996, Wolfe, 2007; Palmer et al, 2011), incorporate top-down guidance as a key mechanism controlling attention.…”