All set! Evidence of simultaneous attentional control settings for multiple target colors

Although models of visual search have often assumed that attention can only be set for a single feature or property at a time, recent studies have suggested that it may be possible to maintain more than one attentional control setting. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether spatial attention could be guided by multiple attentional control settings for color. In a standard spatial cueing task, participants searched for either of two colored targets accompanied by an irrelevantly colored distractor. Across five experiments, results consistently showed that nonpredictive cues matching either target color produced a significant spatial cueing effect, while irrelevantly colored cues did not. This was the case even when the target colors could not be linearly separated from irrelevantly cue colors in color space, suggesting that participants were not simply adopting one general color set that included both target colors. The results could not be explained by intertrial priming by previous targets, nor could they be explained by a single inhibitory set for the distractor color. Overall, the results are most consistent with the maintenance of multiple attentional control settings.     

The representation of color and form in long-term memory

Color and form are elementary stimulus encoding dimensions that have effects on the representation of visual stimuli at early processing stages. Little is known, however, about their effects on visual long-term memory. In three experiments we investigated whether color is part of the memory representation, whether color and form are bound in the memory representation, and the effect of color context on memory performance. Experimental results suggest that color is part of the memory representation and that color and form can be represented separately in memory and accessed independently. We suggest that the binding of color and form is a deliberate strategic act that requires focal attention, not a natural consequence of processing visual stimuli. We compare our results with the predictions of two computational memory models regarding feature binding. The effect of color context was not straightforward; however, results are consistent with the encoding specificity principle.     

Space, object, and task selection

Within the field of selective attention, two separate literatures have developed, one examining the effect of selection of objects and another examining the effect of selection of features. The present study bridged these two traditions by examining the compatibility effects generated by two features of attended and unattended nontarget (foil) stimuli. On each trial, participants determined either the identity or the orientation of a visual stimulus. Spatial attention was controlled using cues (presented prior to the target frame) designed to involuntarily capture attention. We independently manipulated the stimulus dimension the participants prepared for and the stimulus dimension on which they actually executed the task. Preparation had little influence on the magnitude of compatibility effects from foil stimuli. For attended stimuli, the stimulus dimension used in executing the task produced large compatibility effects, regardless of whether that dimension was prepared. These and other compatibility effects (e.g., Stroop effects) are discussed in relation to an integrative model of attentional selection. The key assumptions are that (1) selection occurs at three distinct levels (space, object, and task), (2) spatial attention leads to semantic processing of all dimensions, and (3) features do not automatically activate responses unless that object is selected for action.     

Not so fast: Rethinking the effects of action video games on attentional capacity

Considerable excitement has been generated by recent studies showing that video gaming alters fundamental aspects of attention. We tested the claim that people who frequently play action video games (video game players (VGPs)) have a greater capacity of attention than those who rarely play video games (non‐video game players (NVGPs)). We first attempted to replicate previous findings by comparing VGPs and NVGPs on a flanker compatibility task (Experiment 1). In contrast with previous studies, VGPs did not demonstrate greater intrusion from distractors, calling into question the reliability of previous findings. In Experiment 2, we manipulated the eccentricity of flankers in an Eriksen flanker task to examine the extent to which VGPs and NVGPs processed irrelevant peripheral stimuli. No attentional differences emerged in the conditions tested, with both groups displaying compatibility effects at all eccentricities. Together these results raise doubts that video game playing increases attentional capacity.