Abstract
In a recent article, Schreij, Owens, and Theeuwes (2008) reported that abruptly onsetting distractors produce costs in performance even when spatial-cuing effects confirm the presence of a top-down set for color. The authors argued that these results show that abruptly onsetting new objects capture attention independent of a top-down set and, thus, provide conclusive evidence against the theory that attentional capture is contingent on top-down attentional control settings (Folk, Remington, & Johnston, 1992). In the following article, we argue that, contrary to the conclusion drawn by Schreij et al., their own data (1) disconfirm the claim that their abrupt onsets captured spatial attention and (2) are consistent with nonspatial interference accounts of singleton-distractor effects. In support of the nonspatial account, we show that in a paradigm similar to Schreij et al.’s, distractors that do not capture attention can nonetheless influence responses to a target. We conclude that the results of Schreij et al. do not represent a challenge to contingent capture theory.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Folk, C. L., & Remington, R. W. (1998). Selectivity in distraction by irrelevant featural singletons: Evidence for two forms of attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 847–858.
Folk, C. L., & Remington, R. W. (1999). Can new objects override attentional control settings? Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 729–739.
Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 1030–1044.
Gibson, B. S., & Bryant, T. A. (2008). The identity intrusion effect: Attentional capture or perceptual load. Visual Cognition, 16, 182–199.
Johnson, D. N., McGrath, A., & McNeil, C. (2002). Cuing interacts with perceptual load in visual search. Psychological Science, 13, 284–287.
Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., & Burkell, J. (1983). The cost of visual filtering. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 9, 510–522.
Lavie, N. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 21, 451–468.
Lavie, N., & Cox, S. (1997). On the efficiency of visual selective attention: Efficient visual search leads to inefficient distractor rejection. Psychological Science, 8, 395–398.
Lavie, N., Hirst, A., de Fockert, J. W., & Viding, E. (2004). Load theory of selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 339–354.
Schreij, D., Owens, C., & Theeuwes, J. (2008). Abrupt onsets capture attention independent of top-down control settings. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 208–218.
Theeuwes, J. (1994). Stimulus-driven capture and attentional set: Se lective search for color and visual abrupt onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 799–806.
Theeuwes, J., & Godijn, R. (2002). Irrelevant singletons capture attention: Evidence from inhibition of return. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 764–770.
Theeuwes, J., Kramer, A. F., Hahn, S., Irwin, D. E., & Zelinsky, G. J. (1999). Influence of attentional capture on oculomotor control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25, 1595–1608.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Folk, C.L., Remington, R.W. & Wu, SC. Additivity of abrupt onset effects supports nonspatial distraction, not the capture of spatial attention. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 71, 308–313 (2009). https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.71.2.308
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.71.2.308