Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics

Journal Information
ISSN / EISSN : 19433921 / 1943393X
Current Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC (10.3758)
Total articles ≅ 2,212
Current Coverage
SCOPUS
PUBMED
MEDLINE
MEDICUS
SCIE
SSCI
LOCKSS
Archived in
SHERPA/ROMEO
EBSCO
Filter:

Latest articles in this journal

Doug J. K. Barrett, Oliver Zobay
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics pp 1-19; doi:10.3758/s13414-019-01854-w

Abstract:Simultaneous search for one of two targets is slower and less accurate than search for a single target. Within the Signal Detection Theoretic (SDT) framework, this can be attributed to the division of resources during the comparison of visual input against independently cued targets. The current study used one or two cues to elicit single- and dual-target searches for orientation targets among similar and dissimilar distractors. In Experiment 1, the accuracy of target discrimination in brief displays was compared at setsizes of 1, 2 and 4. Results revealed a reduction in accuracy that scaled with the product of set size and the number of cued targets. In Experiment 2, the accuracy and latency of observers’ saccadic targeting were compared. Fixations on single-target searches were highly selective towards the target. On dual-target searches, the requirement to detect one of two targets produced a significant reduction in target fixations and equivalent rates of fixations to distractors with opposite orientations. For most observers, the dual-target cost was predicted by an SDT model that simulated increases in decision-noise and the distribution of capacity-limited resources during the comparison of selected input against independently cued targets. For others, search accuracy was consistent with a single-item limit on perceptual decisions and saccadic targeting during search. These findings support a flexible account of the dual-target cost based on different strategies to resolve competition between independently cued targets.
Jeff Moher, Joo-Hyun Song
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics pp 1-12; doi:10.3758/s13414-019-01856-8

The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
Bernhard Hommel, Craig S. Chapman, Paul Cisek, Heather F. Neyedli, Joo-Hyun Song, Timothy N. Welsh
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics pp 1-16; doi:10.3758/s13414-019-01846-w

Abstract:In this article, we challenge the usefulness of “attention” as a unitary construct and/or neural system. We point out that the concept has too many meanings to justify a single term, and that “attention” is used to refer to both the explanandum (the set of phenomena in need of explanation) and the explanans (the set of processes doing the explaining). To illustrate these points, we focus our discussion on visual selective attention. It is argued that selectivity in processing has emerged through evolution as a design feature of a complex multi-channel sensorimotor system, which generates selective phenomena of “attention” as one of many by-products. Instead of the traditional analytic approach to attention, we suggest a synthetic approach that starts with well-understood mechanisms that do not need to be dedicated to attention, and yet account for the selectivity phenomena under investigation. We conclude that what would serve scientific progress best would be to drop the term “attention” as a label for a specific functional or neural system and instead focus on behaviorally relevant selection processes and the many systems that implement them.
Atser Damsma, Niels Taatgen, Ritske De Jong, Hedderik Van Rijn
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics pp 1-14; doi:10.3758/s13414-019-01851-z

Abstract:Action and perception are optimized by exploiting temporal regularities, and it has been suggested that the attentional system prioritizes information that contains some form of structure. Indeed, Zhao, Al-Aidroos, and Turk-Browne (Psychological Science, 24(5), 667–677, 2013) found that attention was biased towards the location and low-level visual features of shapes that appeared with a regular order but were irrelevant for the main search task. Here, we investigate whether this bias also holds for irrelevant metrical temporal regularities. In six experiments, participants were asked to perform search tasks. In Experiments 1a–d, sequences of squares, each presented at one of four locations, appeared in between the search trials. Crucially, in one location, the square appeared with a regular rhythm, whereas the timing in the other locations was random. In Experiments 2a and 2b, a sequence of centrally presented colored circles was shown in between the search trials, of which one specific color appeared regularly. We expected that, if attention is automatically biased towards these temporal regularities, reaction times would be faster if the target matches the location (Experiments 1a–d) or color (Experiments 2a–b) of the regular stimulus. However, no reaction time benefit was observed for these targets, suggesting that there was no attentional bias towards the regularity. In addition, we found no evidence for attentional entrainment to the rhythmic stimulus. These results suggest that people do not use implicit rhythmic temporal regularities to guide their attention in the same way as they use order regularities.
Aave Hannus, Harold Bekkering, Frans W. Cornelissen
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics pp 1-13; doi:10.3758/s13414-019-01841-1

Abstract:Visual search often requires combining information on distinct visual features such as color and orientation, but how the visual system does this is not fully understood. To better understand this, we showed observers a brief preview of part of a search stimulus—either its color or orientation—before they performed a conjunction search task. Our experimental questions were (1) whether observers would use such previews to prioritize either potential target locations or features, and (2) which neural mechanisms might underlie the observed effects. In two experiments, participants searched for a prespecified target in a display consisting of bar elements, each combining one of two possible colors and one of two possible orientations. Participants responded by making an eye movement to the selected bar. In our first experiment, we found that a preview consisting of colored bars with identical orientation improved saccadic target selection performance, while a preview of oriented gray bars substantially decreased performance. In a follow-up experiment, we found that previews consisting of discs of the same color as the bars (and thus without orientation information) hardly affected performance. Thus, performance improved only when the preview combined color and (noninformative) orientation information. Previews apparently result in a prioritization of features and conjunctions rather than of spatial locations (in the latter case, all previews should have had similar effects). Our results thus also indicate that search for, and prioritization of, combinations involve conjunctively tuned neural mechanisms. These probably reside at the level of the primary visual cortex.
Zhuanghua Shi, Fredrik Allenmark, Xiuna Zhu, Mark A. Elliott, Hermann J. Müller
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics pp 1-19; doi:10.3758/s13414-019-01857-7

The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
Taylor R. Hayes, John M. Henderson
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics pp 1-10; doi:10.3758/s13414-019-01849-7

The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
Anne Jensen, Simon Merz, Charles Spence, Christian Frings
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics pp 1-20; doi:10.3758/s13414-019-01848-8

The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
Stephen H. Adamo, Patrick H. Cox, Dwight J. Kravitz, Stephen R. Mitroff
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics pp 1-1; doi:10.3758/s13414-019-01845-x