The Spatial Dynamics of Mouse-tracking Reveal That Attention Capture is Stimulus-driven Rather Than Contingent Upon Top-down Goals

Overview

Journal J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform

Specialty Psychology

Date 2019 Jul 2

PMID 31259583

Citations 3

Authors

Michael A Dieciuc

Nelson A Roque

Walter R Boot

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

There has been a longstanding debate over why stimuli capture attention. Some argue that capture is driven by stimulus salience, while others believe that capture only occurs when the features of a stimulus match what we are searching for. This debate has recently focused on attentional disengagement, with the stimulus-driven camp claiming that all salient stimuli capture attention but attention is quickly disengaged from items dissimilar from our target, producing little cost in terms of response time. We used mouse-tracking to examine the spatial effect of cues that either matched or mismatched an observer's target. Experiment 1 demonstrated that a cue mismatching the feature defining the target initially produced a spatial effect that was rapidly resolved, consistent with quick disengagement. Experiment 2 was a preregistered replication with double the sample size that replicated the results of Experiment 1. Overall, computer mouse-tracking provided a direct observation of attentional disengagement, supporting stimulus-driven capture. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Citing Articles

Disentangling decision errors from action execution in mouse-tracking studies: The case of effect-based action control.

Tonn S, Schaaf M, Kunde W, Pfister R Atten Percept Psychophys. 2024; .

PMID: 39567454 DOI: 10.3758/s13414-024-02974-8.

Clustering computer mouse tracking data with informed hierarchical shrinkage partition priors.

Song Z, Shen W, Vannucci M, Baldizon A, Cinciripini P, Versace F Biometrics. 2024; 80(4).

PMID: 39475297 PMC: 11523067. DOI: 10.1093/biomtc/ujae124.

Trait self-control does not predict attentional control: Evidence from a novel attention capture paradigm.

Dieciuc M, Maranges H, Boot W PLoS One. 2019; 14(12):e0224882.

PMID: 31830063 PMC: 6907807. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224882.

References

Burnham B . Displaywide visual features associated with a search display's appearance can mediate attentional capture. Psychon Bull Rev. 2007; 14(3):392-422. DOI: 10.3758/bf03194082. View

Kerzel D, Schonhammer J . Salient stimuli capture attention and action. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2013; 75(8):1633-43. DOI: 10.3758/s13414-013-0512-3. View

Franconeri S, Simons D, Junge J . Searching for stimulus-driven shifts of attention. Psychon Bull Rev. 2005; 11(5):876-81. DOI: 10.3758/bf03196715. View

Cisek P, Kalaska J . Neural mechanisms for interacting with a world full of action choices. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2010; 33:269-98. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.051508.135409. View

Folk C, Remington R, Wright J . The structure of attentional control: contingent attentional capture by apparent motion, abrupt onset, and color. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1994; 20(2):317-29. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.20.2.317. View

Mulckhuyse M, van Zoest W, Theeuwes J . Capture of the eyes by relevant and irrelevant onsets. Exp Brain Res. 2007; 186(2):225-35. PMC: 2668614. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-007-1226-3. View

Belopolsky A, Schreij D, Theeuwes J . What is top-down about contingent capture?. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2010; 72(2):326-41. DOI: 10.3758/APP.72.2.326. View

Freeman J, Ambady N, Midgley K, Holcomb P . The real-time link between person perception and action: brain potential evidence for dynamic continuity. Soc Neurosci. 2010; 6(2):139-55. PMC: 3047598. DOI: 10.1080/17470919.2010.490674. View

Song J . Abandoning and modifying one action plan for alternatives. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2017; 372(1718). PMC: 5332854. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2016.0195. View

10.

Dale R, Kehoe C, Spivey M . Graded motor responses in the time course of categorizing atypical exemplars. Mem Cognit. 2007; 35(1):15-28. DOI: 10.3758/bf03195938. View

11.

Moher J, Anderson B, Song J . Dissociable effects of salience on attention and goal-directed action. Curr Biol. 2015; 25(15):2040-6. PMC: 4526432. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2015.06.029. View

12.

Hunt A, von Muhlenen A, Kingstone A . The time course of attentional and oculomotor capture reveals a common cause. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2007; 33(2):271-84. DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.33.2.271. View

13.

Leber A, Egeth H . It's under control: top-down search strategies can override attentional capture. Psychon Bull Rev. 2006; 13(1):132-8. DOI: 10.3758/bf03193824. View

14.

Van der Stigchel S, Meeter M, Theeuwes J . Eye movement trajectories and what they tell us. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2006; 30(5):666-79. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2005.12.001. View

15.

McPeek R, Keller E . Deficits in saccade target selection after inactivation of superior colliculus. Nat Neurosci. 2004; 7(7):757-63. DOI: 10.1038/nn1269. View

16.

Theeuwes J . Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2010; 135(2):77-99. DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.006. View

17.

Mathot S, Schreij D, Theeuwes J . OpenSesame: an open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2011; 44(2):314-24. PMC: 3356517. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-011-0168-7. View

18.

Jonides J, Yantis S . Uniqueness of abrupt visual onset in capturing attention. Percept Psychophys. 1988; 43(4):346-54. DOI: 10.3758/bf03208805. View

19.

Bacon W, Egeth H . Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture. Percept Psychophys. 1994; 55(5):485-96. DOI: 10.3758/bf03205306. View

20.

Theeuwes J . Endogenous and exogenous control of visual selection. Perception. 1994; 23(4):429-40. DOI: 10.1068/p230429. View