Abstract
Spatial cues help participants detect a visual target when it appears at the cued location. One hypothesis for this cueing effect, called selective perception, is that cueing a location enhances perceptual encoding at that location. Another hypothesis, called selective decision, is that the cue has no effect on perception, but instead provides prior information that facilitates decision-making. We distinguished these hypotheses by comparing a simultaneous display with two spatial locations to sequential displays with two temporal intervals. The simultaneous condition had a partially valid spatial cue, and the sequential condition had a partially valid temporal cue. Selective perception predicts no cueing effect for sequential displays given there is enough time to switch attention. In contrast, selective decision predicts cueing effects for sequential displays regardless of time. We used endogenous cueing of a detection-like coarse orientation discrimination task with clear displays (no external noise or postmasks). Results showed cueing effects for the sequential condition, supporting a decision account of selective attention for endogenous cueing of detection-like tasks.
Highlights
Spatial cues help participants detect a visual target when it appears at the cued location
What causes such spatial cueing effects? One hypothesis, selective perception, posits that perceptual encoding is enhanced for information at the cued location
One recent hypothesis is that selective decision mediates endogenous cueing with clear displays and selective perception contributes to both exogenous and endogenous cuing
Summary
Spatial cues help participants detect a visual target when it appears at the cued location One hypothesis for this cueing effect, called selective perception, is that cueing a location enhances perceptual encoding at that location. Another hypothesis, called selective decision, is that the cue has no effect on perception, but instead provides prior information that facilitates decisionmaking We distinguished these hypotheses by comparing a simultaneous display with two spatial locations to sequential displays with two temporal intervals. For an optimal Bayesian model and a detailed development of this hypothesis, see Shimozaki, Eckstein, and Abbey (2003) For this hypothesis, attentional switching is irrelevant because perception has unlimited capacity and cannot be improved by selective processing of the stimulus. One recent hypothesis is that selective decision mediates endogenous cueing with clear displays and selective perception contributes to both exogenous and endogenous cuing
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
