The role of prior exposure in the capture of attention by items in working memory

Abstract

The Biased Competition Model (BCM) suggests both top-down and bottom-up biases operate on selective attention (e.g., Desimone & Duncan, 1995). It has been suggested that top-down control signals may arise from working memory. In support, Downing (2000) found faster responses to probes presented in the location of stimuli held vs. not held in working memory. Soto, Heinke, Humphreys, and Blanco (2005) showed the involuntary nature of this effect and that shared features between stimuli were sufficient to attract attention. Here we show that stimuli held in working memory had an influence on the deployment of attentional resources even when: (1) It was detrimental to the task, (2) there was equal prior exposure, and (3) there was no bottom-up priming. These results provide further support for involuntary top-down guidance of attention from working memory and the basic tenets of the BCM, but further discredit the notion that bottom-up priming is necessary for the effect to occur.

Acknowledgements

This research collaboration was supported by a Royal Society Joint Project Grant awarded to the first author and Prof. Leonardo Chelazzi (Visit Number: 15081). Data for Experiment 3 were kindly collected by Louise Lawler as part of her placement year research. This manuscript has benefited from comments from Dr David Soto at University Birmingham and two anonymous reviewers.

Notes

¹The “number vs. novel” conditions were used to represent the numerical stimuli in this analysis since these data were available for both levels of the primed/nonprimed number factor (e.g., no observations in the primed number vs. neutral number condition cell).

²Negative priming of the novel numeral is one possibility of the increased effect, but the explanation seems unlikely since neither the neutral vs. novel condition (899 vs. 908 ms), t(35) = − 0.685, ns, nor the picture vs. novel picture conditions (957 vs. 950 ms), t(35) = − 0.50, ns, showed a significant difference in either direction. However, both differences were in the expected direction for a negative priming effect.