4.5 Article

Systemic effects of selection history on learned ignoring

Journal

PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW
Volume 29, Issue 4, Pages 1347-1354

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-021-02050-4

Keywords

Selective attention; Attentional capture; Selection history; Signal suppression; Eye movements

Funding

  1. NIH [R01-DA046410]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite our best intentions, sometimes physically salient but entirely task-irrelevant stimuli can capture our attention. This study examines the time course of eye movements to targets and distractors and finds that frequent exposure to distractors reduces the frequency of eye movements towards them. Additionally, when the distractor appears in a high-probability location, the reaction time to the distractor is slowed, suggesting a slower accumulation of attention at that location.
Despite our best intentions, physically salient but entirely task-irrelevant stimuli can sometimes capture our attention. With learning, it is possible to more efficiently ignore such stimuli, although specifically how the visual system accomplishes this remains to be clarified. Using a sample of young-adult participants, we examined the time course of eye movements to targets and distractors. We replicate a reduced frequency of eye movements to the distractor when appearing in a location at which distractors are frequently encountered. This reduction was observed even for the earliest saccades, when selection tends to be most stimulus-driven. When the distractor appeared at the high-probability location, saccadic reaction time was slowed specifically for distractor-going saccades, suggesting a slowing of priority accumulation at this location. In the event that the distractor was fixated, disengagement from the distractor was also faster when it appeared in the high-probability location. Both proactive and reactive mechanisms of distractor suppression work together to minimize attentional capture by frequently encountered distractors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available