Abstract
Schneider and Shiffrin (1977) proposed that training under consistent stimulus-response mapping (CM) leads to automatic target detection in search tasks. Other theories, such as Treisman and Gelade's (1980) feature integration theory, consider target-distractor discriminability as the main determinant of search performance. The first two experiments pit these two principles against each other. The results show that CM training is neither necessary nor sufficient to achieve optimal search performance. Two other experiments examine whether CM trained targets, presented as distractors in unattended display locations, attract attention away from current targets. The results are again found to vary with target-distractor similarity. Overall, the present study strongly suggests that CM training does not invariably lead to automatic attention attraction in search tasks.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Briggs, G. E., & Johnsen, A. M. (1973). On the nature of central processes in choice reactions. Memory & Cognition, 1, 91–100.
Cheng, P. W. (1985). Categorization and response competition: Two nonautomatic factors. Psychological Review, 92, 585–586.
Chun, M., & Wolfe, J. M. (2001). Visual attention. In B. E. Goldstein (Ed.), Blackwell's handbook of perception (pp. 273–310). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Cousineau, D., & Larochelle, S. (2004). Visual-memory search: An integrative perspective. Psychological Research, 69, 77–105.
Czerwinski, M., Lightfoot, N., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1992). Automatization and training in visual search. American Journal of Psychology, 105, 271–315.
Dumais, S. T. (1979). Perceptual learning in automatic detection: Processes and mechanisms (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1979). Dissertation Abstracts International, 40, 5048–5049.
Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433–458.
Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. [W.] (1992). Beyond the search surface: Visual search and attentional engagement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 578–588.
Fisher, D. L. (1982). Limited-channel models of automatic detection: Capacity and scanning in visual search. Psychological Review, 89, 662–692.
Fisher, D. L. (1984). Central capacity limits in consistent mapping, visual search tasks: Four channels or more? Cognitive Psychology, 16, 449–484.
Fisher, D. L. (1986, August). Hierarchical models of visual search: Serial and parallel processing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Mathematical Psychology, Cambridge, MA.
Haider, H., & Frensch, P. A. (1996). The role of information reduction in skill acquisition. Cognitive Psychology, 30, 304–337.
Humphreys, G. W., Quinlan, P. T., & Riddoch, M. J. (1989). Grouping processes in visual search: Effects with single- and combined-feature targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 258–279.
Joseph, J. S., Chun, M. M., & Nakayama, K. (1997). Attentional requirements in a “preattentive” feature search task. Nature, 379, 805–807.
Kramer, A. F., Strayer, D. L., & Buckley, J. (1990). Development and transfer of automatic processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 16, 505–522.
Kyllingsbæk, S., Schneider, W. X., & Bundesen, C. (2001). Automatic attraction of attention to former targets in visual displays of letters. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 85–98.
Lachter, J., Forster, K. I., & Ruthruff, E. (2004). Forty-five years after Broadbent (1958): Still no identification without attention. Psychological Review, 111, 880–913.
Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492–527.
Logan, G. D. (1992). Shapes of reaction-time distributions and shapes of learning curves: A test of the instance theory of automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 883–914.
McElree, B., & Carrasco, M. (1999). The temporal dynamics of visual search: Evidence for parallel processing in feature and conjunction searches. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25, 1517–1539.
McLeod, P., Driver, J., & Crisp, J. (1988). Visual search for a conjunction of movement and form is parallel. Nature, 332, 154–155.
Nakayama, K., & Silverman, G. H. (1986). Serial and parallel processing of visual feature conjunctions. Nature, 320, 264–265.
Schneider, W. (1989). Micro Experimental Laboratory: An integrated system for IBM PC compatibles. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 20, 206–217.
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002a). E-Prime reference guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002b). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.
Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84, 1–66.
Shiffrin, R. M., & Dumais, S. T. (1981). The development of automatism. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 111–140). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127–190.
Treisman, A. M., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97–136.
Treisman, [A. M.], & Gormican, S. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries. Psychological Review, 95, 15–48.
Treisman, A. [M.], & Sato, S. (1990). Conjunction search revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 16, 459–478.
Wolfe, J. M., Butcher, S. J., Lee, C., & Hyle, M. (2003). Changing your mind: On the contributions of top-down and bottom-up guidance in visual search for feature singletons. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance, 29, 483–502.
Wolfe, J. M., Cave, K. R., & Franzel, S. L. (1989). Guided search: An alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 15, 419–433.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Funding for this research was provided by a National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada grant to S.L.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lefebvre, C., Cousineau, D. & Larochelle, S. Does training under consistent mapping conditions lead to automatic attention attraction to targets in search tasks?. Perception & Psychophysics 70, 1401–1415 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/PP.70.8.1401
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/PP.70.8.1401