Cued distractor rejection disrupts learned distractor rejection

References

• Arita, J. T., Carlisle, N. B., & Woodman, G. F. (2012). Templates for rejection: Configuring attention to ignore task-irrelevant features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(3), 580–584. doi: 10.1037/a0027885
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bacon, W. F., & Egeth, H. E. (1994). Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture. Perception & Psychophysics, 55(5), 485–496. doi: 10.3758/BF03205306
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahle, B., Beck, V. M., & Hollingworth, A. (2018). The architecture of interaction between visual working memory and visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44(7), 992–1011. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000509
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, V. M., & Hollingworth, A. (2015). Evidence for negative feature guidance in visual search is Explained by spatial recoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41(5), 1190–1196. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000109
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, V. M., Hollingworth, A., & Luck, S. J. (2012). Simultaneous control of attention by multiple working memory representations. Psychological Science, 23(8), 887–898. doi: 10.1177/0956797612439068
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, V. M., Luck, S. J., & Hollingworth, A. (2018). Whatever you do, don’t look at the … : Evaluating guidance by an exclusionary attentional template. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44(4), 645–662. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000485
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision. 10, 433–436. doi: 10.1163/156856897X00357
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Braver, T. S. (2012). The variable nature of cognitive control: A dual mechanisms framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 16, 106–113. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2011.12.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bundesen, C. (1990). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97(4), 523–547. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.97.4.523
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (Vol. 2nd). doi: 10.1234/12345678
   Google Scholar
• Cosman, J. D., & Vecera, S. P. (2013). Context-dependent control over attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(3), 836–848. doi: 10.1037/a0030027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cousineau, D. (2005). Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson’s method. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology. 1, 42–45. doi: 10.20982/tqmp.01.1.p042
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, C. A., & Egeth, H. E. (2016). Taming the white bear. Psychological Science, 27(4), 476–485. doi: 10.1177/0956797615626564
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Desimone, R., & Duncan, J. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 18, 193–222. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ne.18.030195.001205
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaspar, J. M., & McDonald, J. J. (2014). Suppression of salient objects prevents distraction in visual search. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(16), 5658–5666. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4161-13.2014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaspelin, N., Leonard, C. J., & Luck, S. J. (2015). Direct evidence for active suppression of salient-but-irrelevant sensory inputs. Psychological Science, 26(11), 1740–1750. doi: 10.1177/0956797615597913
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaspelin, N., Leonard, C. J., & Luck, S. J. (2017). Suppression of overt attentional capture by salient-but-irrelevant color singletons. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79(1), 45–62. doi: 10.3758/s13414-016-1209-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaspelin, N., & Luck, S. J. (2018a). Distinguishing among potential mechanisms of singleton suppression. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 44, 626–644. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000484
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaspelin, N., & Luck, S. J. (2018b). The role of inhibition in avoiding distraction by salient stimuli. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(1), 79–92. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2017.11.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaspelin, N., & Luck, S. J. (2018c). Combined electrophysiological and behavioral evidence for the suppression of salient distractors. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 30(9), 1265–1280. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_01279
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaspelin, N., & Luck, S. J. (2018d). Distinguishing among potential mechanisms of singleton suppression. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44, 626–644. doi:10.1037/xhp0000484
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geng, J. J. (2014). Attentional mechanisms of distractor suppression. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(2), 147–153. doi: 10.1177/0963721414525780
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geng, J. J., & Diquattro, N. E. (2010). Attentional capture by a perceptually salient non-target facilitates target processing through inhibition and rapid rejection. Journal of Vision, 10(6), 5. doi: 10.1167/10.6.5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moher, J., & Egeth, H. E. (2012). The ignoring paradox: Cuing distractor features leads first to selection, then to inhibition of to-be-ignored items. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74(8), 1590–1605. doi: 10.3758/s13414-012-0358-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moher, J., Lakshmanan, B. M., Egeth, H. E., & Ewen, J. B. (2014). Inhibition drives early feature-based attention. Psychological Science, 25(2), 315–324. doi: 10.1177/0956797613511257
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morey, R. D. (2008). Confidence intervals from normalized data: A correction to Cousineau. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology. 4, 61–64. doi: 10.20982/tqmp.04.2.p061
   Google Scholar
• Sawaki, R., & Luck, S. J. (2010). Capture versus suppression of attention by salient singletons: Electrophysiological evidence for an automatic attend-to-me signal. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 72(6), 1455–1470. doi: 10.3758/APP.72.6.1455
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stilwell, B. T., Bahle, B., & Vecera, S. P. (2018). Feature-based statistical regularities of distractors modulate attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000613
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stilwell, B. T., & Vecera, S. P. (2018). Learned and cued distractor rejection for multiple features in visual search. Attention Perception and Psychophysics. doi: 10.3758/s13414-018-1622-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Treisman, A. (1998). Feature binding, attention and object perception. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 353(1373), 1295–1306. doi: 10.1098/rstb.1998.0284
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsal, Y., & Makovski, T. (2006). The attentional white bear phenomenon: The mandatory allocation of attention to expected distractor locations. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 32(2), 351–363. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.32.2.351
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vatterott, D. B., Mozer, M. C., & Vecera, S. P. (2018). Rejecting salient distractors: Generalization from experience. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 80(2), 485–499. doi: 10.3758/s13414-017-1465-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vatterott, D. B., & Vecera, S. P. (2012). Experience-dependent attentional tuning of distractor rejection. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 19(5), 871–878. doi: 10.3758/s13423-012-0280-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vecera, S. P., Cosman, J. D., Vatterott, D. B., & Roper, Z. J. J. (2014). The control of visual attention: Toward a unified account. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 60, 303–347. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-800090-8.00008-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vickery, T. J., King, L.-W., & Jiang, Y. (2005). Setting up the target template in visual search. Journal of Vision, 5(1), 8. doi: 10.1167/5.1.8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wegner, D. M., Schneider, D. J., Carter, S. R., & White, T. L. (1987). Paradoxical effects of thought suppression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(1), 5–13. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.53.1.5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe, J. M. (1994). Guided search 2.0 a revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1(2), 202–238. doi: 10.3758/BF03200774
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe, J. M., Horowitz, T. S., Kenner, N., Hyle, M., & Vasan, N. (2004). How fast can you change your mind? The speed of top-down guidance in visual search. In Vision research (Vol. 44, pp. 1411–1426). Pergamon. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2003.11.024
   Google Scholar
• Woodman, G. F., Carlisle, N. B., & Reinhart, R. M. G. (2013). Where do we store the memory representations that guide attention? Journal of Vision, 13(3), 1–1. doi: 10.1167/13.3.1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodman, G. F., & Luck, S. J. (2007). Do the contents of visual working memory automatically influence attentional selection during visual search? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 33(2), 363–377. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.33.2.363
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zehetleitner, M., Goschy, H., & Müller, H. J. (2012). Top-down control of attention: It’s gradual, practice-dependent, and hierarchically organized. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(4), 941–957. doi: 10.1037/a0027629
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar