Task-irrelevant objects can sometimes capture attention and increase the time it takes an observer to find a target. However, less is known about how these distractors impact visual search strategies. Here, I found that salient distractors reduced rather than increased response times on target-absent trials (Experiment 1; N = 200). Combined with higher error rates on target-present trials, these results indicate that distractors can induce observers to quit search earlier than they otherwise would. These effects were replicated when target prevalence was low (Experiment 2; N = 200) and with different stimuli that elicited shallower search slopes (Experiment 3; N = 75). These results demonstrate that salient distractors can produce at least two consequences in visual search: They can capture attention, and they can cause observers to quit searching early. This novel finding has implications both for understanding visual attention and for examining distraction in real-world domains where targets are often absent, such as medical image screening.
AdamoS. H.CainM. S.MitroffS. R. (2015). Targets need their own personal space: Effects of clutter on multiple-target search accuracy. Perception, 44, 1203–1214.
2.
AdamoS. H.CainM. S.MitroffS. R. (2017). An individual differences approach to multiple-target visual search errors: How search errors relate to different characteristics of attention. Vision Research, 141, 258–265.
3.
AdamoS. H.CainM. S.MitroffS. R. (2018). Satisfaction at last: Evidence for the ‘satisfaction’ account for multiple-target search errors. In NishikawaR. M.SamuelsonF. W. (Eds.), Medical imaging 2018: Image perception, observer performance, and technology assessment (Vol. 10577, Article 105770A). Bellingham, WA: SPIE.
4.
AltmannE. M.TraftonJ. G.HambrickD. Z. (2014). Momentary interruptions can derail the train of thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 215–226. doi:10.1037/a0030986
5.
AndersonB. A.FolkC. L. (2010). Variations in the magnitude of attentional capture: Testing a two-process model. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 72, 342–352. doi:10.3758/APP.72.2.342
BravoM. J.NakayamaK. (1992). The role of attention in different visual-search tasks. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 465–472.
9.
CainM. S.AdamoS. H.MitroffS. R. (2013). A taxonomy of errors in multiple-target visual search. Visual Cognition, 21, 899–921.
10.
ChunM.WolfeJ. M. (1996). Just say no: How are visual searches terminated when there is no target present?Cognitive Psychology, 30, 39–78.
11.
ConnorC. E.EgethH. E.YantisS. (2004). Visual attention: Bottom-up versus top-down. Current Biology, 14, R850–R852. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2004.09.041
12.
FleckM. S.MitroffS. R. (2007). Rare targets are rarely missed in correctable search. Psychological Science, 18, 943–947. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02006.x
13.
FolkC.RemingtonR.JohnstonJ. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 1030–1044.
14.
FranconeriS. L.SimonsD. J. (2003). Moving and looming stimuli capture attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 999–1010.
15.
FreerT. W.UlisseyM. J. (2001). Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: Prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology, 220, 781–786.
16.
GasparJ. M.McDonaldJ. J. (2014). Suppression of salient objects prevents distraction in visual search. The Journal of Neuroscience, 34, 5658–5666. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4161-13.2014
17.
GeyerT.MüllerH. J.KrummenacherJ. (2008). Expectancies modulate attentional capture by salient color singletons. Vision Research, 48, 1315–1326.
18.
GureckisT. M.MartinJ.McDonnellJ.RichA. S.MarkantD.CoenenA.. . . ChanP. (2016). psiTurk: An open-source framework for conducting replicable behavioral experiments online. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 829–842.
19.
LeberA.EgethH. (2006). It’s under control: Top-down search strategies can override attentional capture. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 132–138.
20.
McDonnellJ. V.MartinJ. B.MarkantD. B.CoenenA.RichA. S.GureckisT. M. (2012). psiTurk (Version 1.02) [Computer software]. Retrieved from https://github.com/NYUCCL/psiTurk
21.
MoranR.ZehetleitnerM.MüllerH. J.UsherM. (2013). Competitive guided search: Meeting the challenge of benchmark RT distributions. Journal of Vision, 13(8), Article 24. doi:10.1167/13.8.24
22.
PaolacciG.ChandlerJ. (2014). Inside the Turk: Understanding Mechanical Turk as a participant pool. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 184–188. doi:10.1177/0963721414531598
23.
ReedA. V. (1973). Speed-accuracy trade-off in recognition memory. Science, 181, 574–576.
TheeuwesJ. (1992). Perceptual selectivity for color and form. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 599–606.
26.
TheeuwesJ. (2010). Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychologica, 135, 77–99. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.006
27.
ThompsonK. G.BichotN. P. (2005). A visual salience map in the primate frontal eye field. Progress in Brain Research, 147, 249–262.
28.
TreismanA. M.GeladeG. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97–136.
29.
TuddenhamW. J. (1962). Visual search, image organization, and reader error in roentgen diagnosis: Studies of the Psychophysiology of Roentgen Image Perception Memorial Fund Lecture. Radiology, 78, 694–704.
30.
Van SelstM.JolicoeurP. (1994). A solution to the effect of sample size on outlier elimination. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 47, 631–650.
31.
WatsonM. R.BrennanA. A.KingstoneA.EnnsJ. T. (2010). Looking versus seeing: Strategies alter eye movements during visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 543–549.
32.
WilliamsL. H.DrewT. (2017). Distraction in diagnostic radiology: How is search through volumetric medical images affected by interruptions?Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2, Article 12. doi:10.1186/s41235-017-0050-y
33.
WolfeJ. M. (2012). When do I quit? The search termination problem in visual search. In DoddM.FlowersJ. (Eds.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: The influence of attention, learning, and motivation on visual search (pp. 183–208). New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-4794-8_8
34.
WolfeJ. M. (2018). Visual search. In WixtedJ. T. (Ed.), Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience (4th ed., Vol. 2). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. doi:10.1002/9781119170174.epcn213
35.
WolfeJ. M.HorowitzT. S.KennerN. M. (2005). Rare items often missed in visual searches. Nature, 435, 439–440. doi:10.1038/435439a
36.
WolfeJ. M.HorowitzT. S.Van WertM. J.KennerN. M.PlaceS. S.KibbiN. (2007). Low target prevalence is a stubborn source of errors in visual search tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 623–638.
37.
WolfeJ. M.Van WertM. J. (2010). Varying target prevalence reveals two dissociable decision criteria in visual search. Current Biology, 20, 121–124. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2009.11.066
38.
YantisS.EgethH. (1999). On the distinction between visual salience and stimulus-driven attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 661–676.
39.
YantisS.JonidesJ. (1984). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Evidence from visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 601–621.
40.
YehS.-L.LiaoH.-I. (2010). On the generality of the displaywide contingent orienting hypothesis: Can a visual onset capture attention without top-down control settings for displaywide onset?Acta Psychologica, 135, 159–167. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.05.013
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
