Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

A dissociation between attention and selection.

R W Remington1, C L Folk

  • 1NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, USA. rremington@mail.arc.nasa.gov

Psychological Science
|January 5, 2002
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

How human is SOAR?

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2014
Same author

Visual crowding is anisotropic along the horizontal meridian during smooth pursuit.

Journal of vision·2014
Same author

Spatial cuing in a stereoscopic display: Evidence for a "depth-blind" attentional spotlight.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2013
Same author

Switching between simple cognitive tasks: the interaction of top-down and bottom-up factors.

Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance·2002
Same author

Contingent attentional capture or delayed allocation of attention?

Perception & psychophysics·2001
Same author

Visual search in complex displays: factors affecting conflict detection by air traffic controllers.

Human factors·2001
Same journal

Does Overconfidence Really Confer Adaptive Benefits to Children's Learning?

Psychological science·2026
Same journal

How Does the Mind Grow? Cross-Cultural Intuitive Theories of Mental Development.

Psychological science·2026
Same journal

Not All Practice Is Created Equal: Longitudinal Evidence From Over 40,000 Chess Players.

Psychological science·2026
Same journal

Eye Glint as a Novel Perceptual Cue in Human Vision.

Psychological science·2026
Same journal

Multitarget Visual Search Flexibly Switches Between Concurrent and Sequential Search Modes.

Psychological science·2026
Same journal

Motive Alignment Promotes Adolescents' Proenvironmental Behavior: A Field Experiment in Two Cultures.

Psychological science·2026
See all related articles

Spatial attention does not automatically process all stimulus features. Task expectations can limit processing to relevant dimensions, challenging the notion of attention-based selection.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Neuroscience
  • Human Perception

Background:

  • The prevailing view posits that spatial attention selects entire objects or regions, processing all their features regardless of relevance.
  • This assumption is supported by interference effects, like the Stroop effect, where irrelevant stimulus dimensions disrupt performance.
  • However, the precise mechanisms and limitations of attentional selection remain under investigation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate whether attentional selection inherently processes all feature dimensions of a stimulus.
  • To determine if processing can be restricted to task-relevant dimensions even when attention is allocated.
  • To explore the role of task expectations in modulating the depth of feature processing.

Main Methods:

Related Experiment Videos

  • Conducted two spatial cuing experiments.
  • Manipulated attentional focus using spatial cues.
  • Assessed processing of attended stimuli based on task relevance.

    • Main Results:

    • Demonstrated that interference effects are not solely due to the allocation of attention.
    • Showed that processing of attended stimuli can be restricted to task-relevant dimensions.
    • Evidence suggests that attentional selection is not an all-or-none phenomenon.

    Conclusions:

    • Attentional selection is a more nuanced process than simple focusing; it involves strategic control over feature processing.
    • Task expectations significantly influence the depth to which elementary feature dimensions of attended stimuli are processed.
    • These findings challenge the traditional view of attentional selection and highlight the role of cognitive control.