Abstract
Memory affects visual search, as is particularly evident from findings that when target features are repeated from one trial to the next, selection is faster. Two views have emerged on the nature of the memory representations and mechanisms that cause these intertrial priming effects: independent feature weighting versus episodic retrieval of previous trials. Previous research has attempted to disentangle these views focusing on short term effects. Here, we illustrate that the episodic retrieval models make the unique prediction of long-term priming: biasing one target type will result in priming of this target type for a much longer time, well after the bias has disappeared. We demonstrate that such long-term priming is indeed found for the visual feature of color, but only in conjunction search and not in singleton search. Two follow-up experiments showed that it was the kind of search (conjunction versus singleton) and not the difficulty, that determined whether long-term priming occurred. Long term priming persisted unaltered for at least 200 trials, and could not be explained as the result of explicit strategy. We propose that episodic memory may affect search more consistently than previously thought, and that the mechanisms for intertrial priming may be qualitatively different for singleton and conjunction search. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.3758/s13414-015-0860-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Highlights
A powerful factor determining where we look and what we attend is where we have looked and what we have attended before
We present experiments to directly test these contrasting predictions: If feature biases yield robust facilitation that persists once the bias is long gone, this is in line with the predictions of memory retrieval, and thereby agree with an episodic retrieval account of priming
We explored whether participants’ experience of the bias could serve as a predictor for their long-term priming effect, but a Bayesian regression analysis showed evidence for the absence of a correlation, both when effects are collapsed over all neutral blocks (BF0,β = 5.2) as when only the last block was considered (BF0,β = 5.2)
Summary
A powerful factor determining where we look and what we attend is where we have looked and what we have attended before. The effects of our previous overt and covert shifts of attention on our current ones are often investigated by comparing visual search in which targets must be found with either the same features as on previous trials, or with different features. Repetitions cause shorter saccade latencies (Becker, 2008; McPeek et al, 1999) and bias target selection (Brascamp et al, 2011a; Meeter and Van der Stigchel, 2013). Such repetition effects have been found to affect vision largely out of the observers control (Maljkovic and Nakayama, 1994; Huang et al, 2004; Hillstrom, 2000).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
