Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

The visual search and target-target cueing literatures have reached opposite conclusions about whether a shift of attention is biased toward or away from, respectively, previously attended target locations. In this article, we aimed to figure out why. The main differences between the two experimental approaches concern (1) the stimulus-response translation rules ("what" identification keypresses vs. "where" localization responses), (2) the amount of attention required in order to identify the target, and (3) distractor presence or absence. Experiment 1 tested the role of stimulus-response translation rules by requiring both an eye movement "where" response and a keypress "what" response to each target, in a typical search paradigm. Eye movements showed a bias away from the vicinity of the previous target, whereas keypresses showed a bias toward the previous target location, but only when the keypress response repeated. Experiment 2 removed the keypress identification requirement, to test whether reducing the amount of attention to the target would alter the eye movement bias; it did not. Experiment 3 removed the distractors, to test whether eliminating the potential for distractor location effects would alter the eye movement bias; it did, by accentuating the eye movement bias against the last target location. Collectively, the findings revealed that different stimulus-response translation rules and distractor-processing requirements are the main reasons for the discrepancy, while demonstrating that shifts of attention intrinsically tend away from prior target locations. The findings are generally consistent with episodic-retrieval and inhibited spatial-reorienting theories.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01569-xDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

eye movement
16
target location
12
stimulus-response translation
12
translation rules
12
movement bias
12
target
9
attention biased
8
eye movements
8
target locations
8
amount attention
8

Similar Publications

Insight problem solving involves overcoming an impasse when a solution seems unreachable, often experienced as an 'Aha!' moment. In such solving, shifting from an incorrect representation imposed by constraints to a correct representation through constraint relaxation is critical. Prior research compared brain activity when constraint relaxation and representation change occurred versus when they did not occur, but neural activity before and after such changes within trials has remained underexplored.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

While Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) is widely recognized as an effective treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), its safety profile remains underexamined. This review critically evaluates the extent to which adverse effects are reported and monitored in EMDR research. We analyzed 51 randomized controlled trials from recent meta-analyses on EMDR for PTSD and found that only nine studies mentioned adverse effects, with just one employing systematic assessment protocols.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Children with amblyopia read slower than their peers during binocular viewing. Ocular motor dysfunction typical of amblyopia may cause slow reading. It is unclear whether this is due to fixation instability or increased forward saccades.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objective: To clarify the potential risks and causative mechanisms of glare from nighttime road fill lights on driving safety, this study investigates the dual interference of glare-induced visual cognitive load and physiological stress.

Methods: A field driving experiment involving 20 drivers was conducted, with real-time collection of visual data (e.g.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Acute sleep deprivation (SD) rapidly alleviates depression, addressing a critical gap in mood disorder treatment. Rapid eye movement SD (REM SD) modulates the excitability of vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) neurons, influencing the synaptic plasticity of pyramidal neurons. However, the precise mechanism remains undefined.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF