The problem of latent attentional capture: Easy visual search conceals capture by task-irrelevant abrupt onsets.

Abstract

Researchers are sharply divided regarding whether irrelevant abrupt onsets capture spatial attention. Numerous studies report that they do and a roughly equal number report that they do not. This puzzle has inspired numerous attempts at reconciliation, none gaining general acceptance. We propose that abrupt onsets routinely capture attention, but the size of observed capture effects depends critically on how long attention dwells on distractor items which, in turn, depends critically on search difficulty. In a series of spatial cuing experiments, we show that irrelevant abrupt onsets produce robust capture effects when visual search is difficult, but not when search is easy. Critically, this effect occurs even when search difficulty varies randomly across trials, preventing any strategic adjustments of the attentional set that could modulate probability of capture by the onset cue. We argue that easy visual search provides an insensitive test for stimulus-driven capture by abrupt onsets: even though onsets truly capture attention, the effects of capture can be latent. This observation helps to explain previous failures to find capture by onsets, nearly all of which employed an easy visual search.

Immunity to attentional capture at ignored locations

“…At attended locations, participants were slower on invalid trials (531 ms) than valid trials (511 ms), t (35) = 5.196, p < .001, 95% CI [12.3, 28.1], indicating a 20-ms cue validity effect. This finding is consistent with previous studies showing attentional capture by onsets (e.g., Gaspelin et al, 2016) and demonstrates the general sensitivity of our paradigm to detect attentional capture effects.…”

“…Specifically, we used a somewhat more difficult search task: looking for the target circle and rejecting the oval distractor. Previous research has shown that increasing search difficulty increases cue validity effects from abrupt onsets (Gaspelin et al, 2016, Experiment 7). An added benefit would be demonstrating that the findings of Experiment 1 generalize to a different search task.…”

“…We expected capture effects for abrupt onsets appearing at the attended locations based on the findings of Gaspelin et al (2016) that capture effects from abrupt onsets can be latent in very easy visual searches but emerge in more difficult searches. The main question was whether capture would also occur for abrupt onsets appearing at to-be-ignored locations.…”

“…Attentional capture allows stimuli to automatically grab spatial attention. Researchers debate whether attentional capture is based on stimulus salience (e.g., Theeuwes, 1992; Gaspelin, Ruthruff, & Lien, 2016) and/or task-relevance (e.g., Folk, Remington, & Johnston, 1992). …”

Suppression of overt attentional capture by salient-but-irrelevant color singletons

“…There was no time at which oculomotor capture was observed. In summary, although dwell times may sometimes play an important role in the size of observed capture effects (Fukuda & Vogel, 2011; Gaspelin et al, 2016; Geng & Diquattro, 2010; Theeuwes, 2010; van Zoest et al, 2004), the current suppression effects cannot be attributed to mere rapid disengagement.…”