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

Top-down control over biased competition during covert spatial orienting.

Edward Awh1, Michi Matsukura, John T Serences

  • 1Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene 97403-1227, USA. awh@darkwing.uoregon.edu

Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance
|April 3, 2003
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

Selective removal of visual working memory items at test.

Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991)·2026
Same author

Selective removal of visual working memory items at test.

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2026
Same author

Past and present goals are represented concurrently during visual search.

PLoS biology·2026
Same author

Similarity-driven compression during encoding supports biased but more precise working memory.

Journal of vision·2026
Same author

Content-Independent Pointers Mediate Working Memory Storage for Both Visual and Verbal Stimuli.

Journal of cognitive neuroscience·2026
Same author

Training Under Attentional Competition Produces Persistent Biases in Visual Appearance.

ArXiv·2026
Same journal

Human thermal sensitivity drifts at extreme temperatures.

Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance·2026
Same journal

Dynamic competition between selective attention and spatial prediction during visual search.

Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance·2026
Same journal

Encapsulation of the visual perception of social events from semantic priming.

Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance·2026
Same journal

Biasmapping: Idiosyncratic covert search in the vicinity of fixation.

Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance·2026
Same journal

What are you still waiting for? Fricative recognition shows encapsulated processing and is partially predicted by secondary cue reliance.

Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance·2026
Same journal

Eye movements reveal that drivers can predict the location of hazards in dynamic road scenes but gaze and awareness are dissociable.

Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance·2026
See all related articles

Spatial attention benefits increase with higher distractor probability, showing attention enhances visual processing by suppressing interference. This suggests attentional control settings optimize distractor exclusion when interference is likely.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Neuroscience
  • Visual Attention

Background:

  • Spatial attention is crucial for visual processing.
  • Previous research suggests spatial selection aids by suppressing distractors.
  • The precise mechanisms by which attentional control influences this suppression are not fully understood.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate how the probability of distractor interference affects the benefits of spatial attention.
  • To determine if attentional control settings modulate distractor suppression independently of signal enhancement.

Main Methods:

  • Participants performed a visual task with identical displays under varying probabilities of distractor interference.
  • Cuing effects were measured to quantify the benefits of spatial attention.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Control conditions without distractors were used to isolate interference effects.

    • Main Results:

    • Cuing effects significantly increased as the probability of distractor interference rose.
    • The probability of interference did not impact cuing effects when distractors were absent.
    • These findings indicate that attentional control settings enhance distractor exclusion when interference is probable.

    Conclusions:

    • Attentional control settings dynamically adjust visual processing.
    • Increased distractor probability leads to heightened distractor exclusion.
    • Spatial attention's role extends beyond directing focus to actively suppressing interference based on predicted likelihood.