Abstract
Previous research on the priming effect in conjunction search has shown that repeating the target and distractor features across displays speeds mean response times but does not improve search efficiency: Repetitions do not reduce the set size effect—that is, the effect of the number of distractor items—but only modulate the intercept of the search function. In the present study, we investigated whether priming modulates search efficiency when a conjunctively defined target randomly changes between red and green. The results from an eyetracking experiment show that repeating the target across trials reduced the set size effect and, thus, did enhance search efficiency. Moreover, the probability of selecting the target as the first item in the display was higher when the target—distractor displays were repeated across trials than when they changed. Finally, red distractors were selected more frequently than green distractors when the previous target had been red (and vice versa). Taken together, these results indicate that priming in conjunction search modulates processes concerned with guiding attention to the target, by assigning more attentional weight to features sharing the previous target’s color.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Becker, S. I. (2007). Irrelevant singletons in pop-out search: Attentional capture or filtering costs? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 33, 764–787.
Becker, S. I. (2008a). Can intertrial effects of features and dimensions be explained by a single theory? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 34, 1417–1440.
Becker, S. I. (2008b). The mechanism of priming: Episodic retrieval or priming of pop-out? Acta Psychologica, 127, 324–339.
Becker, S. I. (2008c). The stage of priming: Are intertrial repetition effects attentional or decisional? Vision Research, 48, 664–684.
Deubel, H., & Schneider, W. X. (1996). Saccade target selection and object recognition: Evidence for a common attentional mechanism. Vision Research, 36, 1827–1837.
Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433–458.
D’Zmura, M. (1991). Color in visual search. Vision Research, 31, 951–966.
Egeth, H. E., Virzi, R. A., & Garbart, H. (1984). Searching for conjunctively defined targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 10, 32–39.
Found, A., & Müller, H. J. (1996). Searching for unknown feature targets on more than one dimension: Investigating a “dimensionweighting” account. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 88–101.
Geyer, T., Müller, H. J., & Krummenacher, J. (2006). Cross-trial priming in visual search for singleton conjunction targets: Role of repeated target and distractor features. Perception & Psychophysics, 68, 736–749.
Goolsby, B. A., & Suzuki, S. (2001). Understanding priming of colorsingleton search: Roles of attention at encoding and “retrieval.” Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 929–944.
Hillstrom, A. P. (2000). Repetition effects in visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 800–817.
Huang, L., Holcombe, A. O., & Pashler, H. (2004). Repetition priming in visual search: Episodic retrieval, not feature priming. Memory & Cognition, 32, 12–20.
Huang, L., & Pashler, H. (2005). Attention capacity and task difficulty in visual search. Cognition, 94, B101-B111.
Itti, L., & Koch, C. (2000). A saliency-based search mechanism for overt and covert shifts of visual attention. Vision Research, 40, 1489–1506.
Kaptein, N. A., Theeuwes, J., & van der Heijden, A. H. C. (1995). Search for a conjunctively defined target can be selectively limited to a color-defined subset of elements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 21, 1053–1069.
Kristjánsson, Á. (2006a). Rapid learning in attention shifts: A review. Visual Cognition, 13, 324–362.
Kristjánsson, Á. (2006b). Simultaneous priming along multiple feature dimensions in a visual search task. Vision Research, 46, 2554–2570.
Kristjánsson, Á., Wang, D., & Nakayama, K. (2002). The role of priming in conjunctive visual search. Cognition, 85, 37–52.
Kunar, M. A., Flusberg, S., Horowitz, T. S., & Wolfe, J. M. (2007). Does contextual cuing guide the deployment of attention? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 33, 816–828.
Leonard, C. J., & Egeth, H. E. (2008). Attentional guidance in singleton search: An examination of top-down, bottom-up, and intertrial factors. Visual Cognition, 16, 1078–1091.
Maljkovic, V., & Nakayama, K. (1994). Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features. Memory & Cognition, 22, 657–672.
Maljkovic, V., & Nakayama, K. (1996). Priming of pop-out: II. The role of position. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 977–991.
McLeod, P., Driver, J., & Crisp, J. (1988). Visual search for a conjunction of movement and form is parallel. Nature, 332, 154–155.
McPeek, R. M., Maljkovic, V., & Nakayama, K. (1999). Saccades require focal attention and are facilitated by a short-term memory system. Vision Research, 39, 1555–1566.
Meeter, M., & Olivers, C. N. L. (2006). Intertrial priming stemming from ambiguity: A new account of priming in visual search. Visual Cognition, 13, 202–222.
Müller, H. J., Heller, D., & Ziegler, J. (1995). Visual search for singleton feature targets within and across feature dimensions. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 1–17.
Nakayama, K., & Silverman, G. H. (1986). Serial and parallel processing of visual feature conjunctions. Nature, 320, 264–265.
Olivers, C. N. L., & Humphreys, G. W. (2003). Attentional guidance by salient feature singletons depends on intertrial contingencies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 650–657.
Olivers, C. N. L., & Meeter, M. (2006). On the dissociation between compound and present/absent tasks in visual search: Intertrial priming is ambiguity driven. Visual Cognition, 13, 1–28.
Palmer, J. (1995). Attention in visual search: Distinguishing four causes of a set-size effect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4, 118–123.
Rauschenberger, R., & Yantis, S. (2006). Perceptual encoding efficiency in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 116–131.
Treisman, A. [M.] (1982). Perceptual grouping and attention in visual search for features and for objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 8, 194–214.
Treisman, A. [M.] (1988). Features and objects: The Fourteenth Bartlett Memorial Lecture. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40A, 201–237.
Treisman, A. M. & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97–136.
Treisman, A. [M.], & Sato, S. (1990). Conjunction search revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 16, 459–478.
Treisman, A. [M.], & Souther, J. (1985). Search asymmetry: A diagnostic for preattentive processing of separable features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 285–310.
Wang, D., Kristjánsson, Á., & Nakayama, K. (2005). Efficient visual search without top-down or bottom-up guidance. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 239–253.
Wolfe, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 202–238.
Wolfe, J. M. (1998). Visual search. In H. Pashler (Ed.), Attention (pp. 13–73). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
Wolfe, J. M., Cave, K. R., & Franzel, S. L. (1989). Guided search: An alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 15, 419–433.
Wolfe, J. M., Friedman-Hill, S. R., Stewart, M. I., & O’Connell, K. M. (1992). The role of categorization in visual search for orientation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 34–49.
Yantis, S., & Egeth, H. E. (1999). On the distinction between visual salience and stimulus-driven attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25, 661–676.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Note—Accepted by the previous editorial team, when Thomas H. Carr was Editor.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Becker, S.I., Horstmann, G. A feature-weighting account of priming in conjunction search. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 71, 258–272 (2009). https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.71.2.258
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.71.2.258