Spatial attention was measured in visual search tasks using a spatial probe Both speed and accuracy measures showed that in a conjunction task, spatial attention was allocated to locations according to the presence of target features Also, contrary to some predictions, spatial attention was used when a clearly distinguishable feature defined the target The results raise questions about any account that assumes separate mechanisms for feature and conjunction search The probe method demonstrated here allows a very direct measurement of attentional allocation, and may uncover aspects of selection not revealed by visual search
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CaveK.R. (1995). Measuring the allocation of spatial attention. Manuscript submitted for publication.
2.
CaveK.R.WolfeJ.M. (1990). Modeling the role of parallel processing in visual searchCognitive Psychology, 22, 225–271.
3.
DowningC.PinkerS. (1985).The spatial structure of visual attentionInPosnerM.I.MannO. S. M., (Eds.), Attention and performance XI (pp.171–187) Hillsdale, NJErlbaum.
4.
DuncanJ.HumphreysG. (1989) Visual search and stimulus similarityPsychological Review, 96, 433–458.
5.
HoffmanJ.E.NelsonB.HouckM.R. (1983). The role of attentional resources in automatic detectionCognitive Psychology, 15, 379–410.
6.
KochC.UllmanS. (1985). Shifts in selective visual attention Towards the underlying neural circuityHuman Neurobiology, 4, 219–227.
7.
LaBergeD. (1983). Spatial extent of attention lo letters and wordsJournal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance, 9, 371–379.
8.
LaBergeD.BrownV. (1989). Theory of attentional operations in shape identificationPsychology Review, 96, 101–124.
9.
LuckS.J.FanS.HillyardS.A. (1993). Attention-related modulation of sensory-evoked brain activity in a visual search taskJournal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 188–195.
10.
NissenM. (1985). Accessing features and objects Is location special?InPosnerM.I.MannO. S. M., (Eds.), Attention and performance XI (pp.205–219) Hillsdale, NJErlbaum.
11.
RizzolattiG.RiggioL.DascolaI.UmiltaC. (1987). Reorienting attention across the horizontal and vertical meridians Evidence in favor of a premotor theory of attentionNeuropsychological, 25, 31–40.
12.
SagiD.JuleszB. (1986). Enhanced detection in the aperture of focal attention on during simple discrimination tasksNature, 321, 693–695.
TreismanA.M. (1988). Features and objects The Fourteenth Bartlett Memorial LectureQuarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40A, 201–237.
16.
TreismanA.M.GeladeG. (1980). A feature integration theory of attentionCognitive Psychology, 12, 97–136.
17.
TreismanA.M.GormicanS. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision Evidence from search asymmetricPsychological Review, 95, 15–48.
18.
TreismanA.M.SoutherJ. (1985). Search asymmetry A diagnostic for pre attentive processing of separable featuresJournal of Experimental Psychology General, 114, 285–310.
19.
TsalY.LavieN. (1993). Location dominance in attending to color and shapeJournal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance, 19, 131–139.
20.
WolfeJ.M.CaveK.R.FranzelS. (1989). Guided search An alternative to the feature mtefration model for visual searchJournal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance15, 419–433.
21.
WolfeJ.M.PokornyC.W. (1990). Inhibitory tagging m visual search A failure to replicatePerception & Psychophysics, 48, 357–362.
