Revisiting preview search at isoluminance: new onsets are not necessary for the preview advantage.
It has been argued that search performance under preview conditions relies on automatic capture by luminance onsets (Donk & Theeuwes, 2001). We present three experiments in which preview search was examined with both isoluminant and nonisoluminant items (e.g., as defined by luminance onsets). Experiment 1 provided evidence against the automatic capture of attention by onsets. Search benefited when onset previews were followed by new onset stimuli, as compared with a full-set baseline matched for the number of new onsets but in which half the distractors appeared simultaneously at isoluminance. Furthermore, both Experiments 1 and 2 established a preview advantage when isoluminant targets followed onset previews, when compared with appropriate full-set baselines. Experiment 3 replicated this result, while showing that the preview benefit was disrupted by dual-task interference. The data indicate that new onsets are not necessary to generate a preview advantage in search. We discuss the data in terms of search's benefiting from active inhibition of old onset-defined stimuli.
Braithwaite
Jason J
JJ
School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England. j.j.braithwaite@bham.ac.uk
Humphreys
Glyn W
GW
Watson
Derrick G
DG
Hulleman
Johan
J
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D001288:Attention; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007266:Inhibition, Psychological; D008027:Light; D008297:Male; D011930:Reaction Time; D014796:Visual Perception