Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic

In order to make good decisions, we use our knowledge and our reasoning. Often, this knowledge and reasoning is sound and solid. However, sometimes, we are swayed by biases or by others manipulating a situation. For example, let’s say you and three friends wanted to rent a house and had a combined target budget of $1,600. The realtor shows you only very run-down houses for $1,600 and then shows you a very nice house for $2,000. Might you ask each person to pay more in rent to get the...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

Pragmatic cluster-randomised trial of a multidomain intervention to prevent hospital-acquired disability: the OPTIMAge-IT study protocol.

BMC geriatrics·2026

Same author

The role of top-down and bottom-up factors in parafoveal reading.

Frontiers in cognition·2026

Same author

Distribution of visuo-attentional resources while reading multiple words.

PloS one·2026

Same author

Global and Local Processing of Letters and Faces in Children and Adolescents with Typical and Atypical Development.

Brain sciences·2026

Same author

Effectiveness of cognitive interventions in healthy aging: A systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis.

Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews·2026

Same author

Prepared for the expected but unready for the unexpected: Unmet distractor expectations slow braking responsiveness but improve lane-keeping precision in a virtual driving simulation.

PloS one·2025

Same journal

Identifying distinct sources of whole number interference in children's decimal comparison: the role of numerical magnitude and inhibitory control.

Cognition·2026

Same journal

Evidence for abstract spatial concept learning in young animals.

Cognition·2026

Same journal

Blurred lines or clear boundaries? Synchrony and social dominance shape domain-specific self-other processing.

Cognition·2026

Same journal

Knowability predicts curiosity and learning.

Cognition·2026

Same journal

Throwing good effort after bad: Evidence for a sunk-cost effect in cognitive effort-based decision-making.

Cognition·2026

Same journal

Cross-linguistic differences in incremental planning under uncertainty.

Cognition·2026

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 3, 2026

Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking

Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking

Published on: August 29, 2018

Distractor context manipulation in visual search: How expectations modulate proactive control.

Marco A Petilli¹, Francesco Marini², Roberta Daini³

¹Department of Psychology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.

|November 26, 2019

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Top-down processes in visual search, driven by distractor expectation, create performance trade-offs. These proactive top-down task-sets influence accuracy and response times, especially in conjunction search tasks.

Keywords:

Distractor context manipulation paradigm Distractor expectation Feature search Proactive control Top-down control Visual search

More Related Videos

Irrelevant Stimuli and Action Control: Analyzing the Influence of Ignored Stimuli via the Distractor-Response Binding Paradigm

Irrelevant Stimuli and Action Control: Analyzing the Influence of Ignored Stimuli via the Distractor-Response Binding Paradigm

Published on: May 14, 2014

A Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate Interference in Working Memory by Distractions and Interruptions

A Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate Interference in Working Memory by Distractions and Interruptions

Published on: July 16, 2015

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 3, 2026

Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking

Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking

Published on: August 29, 2018

Irrelevant Stimuli and Action Control: Analyzing the Influence of Ignored Stimuli via the Distractor-Response Binding Paradigm

Irrelevant Stimuli and Action Control: Analyzing the Influence of Ignored Stimuli via the Distractor-Response Binding Paradigm

Published on: May 14, 2014

A Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate Interference in Working Memory by Distractions and Interruptions

A Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate Interference in Working Memory by Distractions and Interruptions

Published on: July 16, 2015

Area of Science:

Cognitive Psychology
Neuroscience
Visual Perception

Background:

Visual search relies on both bottom-up and top-down processing.
Expectations about distractors can shape cognitive strategies, influencing search performance.

Purpose of the Study:

To investigate the role of proactive top-down processes in distractor expectation during feature and conjunction visual search.
To quantify the impact of distractor expectation on search performance.

Main Methods:

Participants performed feature and conjunction visual search tasks.
Distractor stimuli were either frequently presented or absent.
Response times and accuracy were measured under varying distractor conditions and task parameters.

Main Results:

Distractor expectation led to slower but more accurate responses in distractor-absent trials within frequent-distractor contexts.
These effects were more pronounced in conjunction search compared to feature search.
The observed effects were consistent across different stimulus durations, time pressures, and predictability of distractor presence.

Conclusions:

Top-down task-sets related to distractor expectation introduce performance costs and benefits in visual search.
These proactive processes operate over extended periods (task blocks) rather than on a trial-by-trial basis.
Distractor expectation significantly modulates visual search, particularly in more complex conjunction search tasks.