Top-down contingent feature-specific orienting with and without awareness of the visual input

Abstract

In the present article, the role of endogenous feature-specific orienting for conscious and unconscious vision is reviewed. We start with an overview of orienting. We proceed with a review of masking research, and the definition of the criteria of experimental protocols that demonstrate endogenous and exogenous orienting, respectively. Against this background of criteria, we assess studies of unconscious orienting and come to the conclusion that so far studies of unconscious orienting demonstrated endogenous feature-specific orienting. The review closes with a discussion of the role of unconscious orienting in action control.

Occipital TMS at phosphene detection threshold captures attention automatically

“…Attentional capture has recently been demonstrated to operate not as an all-ornone process but rather more gradually, with capture strength increasing with cue contrast (Fuller et al, 2009;Zehetleitner et al, 2013). Another body of work suggests that attentional capture can be modulated through top-down factors such as task set (Ansorge et al, 2011;Folk et al, 1992;Hsieh et al, 2011). The present results demonstrate an additional determinant of capture strength Table 1 Results of stepwise modeling of cue visibility reports as a function of cue type (control vs. phosphenes, phosphenes vs. real cues) and cue validity (valid vs. invalid), together with degrees of freedom per model and goodness-of-fit parameters (AIC, BIC, and G 2 ) of the models.…”

Masked Priming of Conceptual Features Reveals Differential Brain Activation during Unconscious Access to Conceptual Action and Sound Information

“…Investigating unconscious automatic word processing though precludes a possible contribution of strategic imagery processes. Unconscious word processing can be probed by using a masked priming paradigm: Pattern masks (e.g., a random sequence of letters) which are displayed before and after a prime word stimulus [37], [38] eliminate conscious perception of prime words, although they still trigger cognitive processes at several levels of complexity including semantic processing (for reviews, see [37], [39], [40]–[43]). Unconscious word processing can be then measured via subliminal priming effects (e.g., facilitation) by masked prime words on subsequent processing of visible targets [44]–[47].…”

Involuntary attentional orienting to counterproductive exogenous cues

“…As such, this effect in turn meets one of the main criteria of bottom-up or exogenous attention (Jonides, 1981). Thus, it can be considered evidence in favour of an automatic nature of the orienting response (see also Ansorge et al, 2011).…”

“…In conditions of maximal uncertainty (i.e., at short SOAs), they will tend to minimize effort and, therefore, judge more often that the sound on the left appeared first. To reduce the influence of this bias, one can use an orthogonal-response paradigm (see Shore et al, 2001), meaning that attention is manipulated on a different dimension than the task-relevant dimension (see also Ansorge, Horstmann, & Scharlau, 2011;Kiefer et al, 2011). In the example above, attention is manipulated on a spatial dimension (i.e., right or left) but, instead of using a spatial response dimension ("Which tone was first, the one on the left or right ear?…”

“…Conversely, it is reasonable to state that even though the attentional shifts are modulated by endogenous factors, they are still driven by external stimuli to some extent, making them exogenous given the external stimuli and pre-established attentional task set. According to Ansorge et al (2011), to be able to call into question purely exogenous orienting, there must be a lack of a suited endogenous feature-specific search criterion as a prerequisite for an orienting effect. In accordance with this criterion, support has been found for exogenous orienting towards reportable stimuli, but not for non-reportable stimuli, thereby making visual awareness an important prerequisite for this phenomenon (see also Kiefer et al, 2011; but see McCormick, 1997;Mulckhuyse, Talsma, & Theeuwes, 2007).…”