Cited by 168Visual perception and processing mechanismsVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Feature-based attention: it is all bottom-up priming

Open access
Theeuwes, Jan·2013·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Feature-based attention (FBA) enhances the representation of image characteristics throughout the visual field, a mechanism that is particularly useful when searching for a specific stimulus feature. Even though most theories of visual search implicitly or explicitly assume that FBA is under top-down control, we argue that the role of top-down processing in FBA may be limited. Our review of the literature indicates that all behavioural and neuro-imaging studies investigating FBA suffer from the shortcoming that they cannot rule out an effect of priming. The mere attending to a feature enhances the mandatory processing of that feature across the visual field, an effect that is likely to occur in an automatic, bottom-up way. Studies that have investigated the feasibility of FBA by means of cueing paradigms suggest that the role of top-down processing in FBA is limited (e.g. prepare for red). Instead, the actual processing of the stimulus is needed to cause the mandatory tuning of responses throughout the visual field. We conclude that it is likely that all FBA effects reported previously are the result of bottom-up priming.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rstb.2013.0055

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Theeuwes (2013) argued that the role of intertrial priming is often underestimated and its influence on attentional selection is often erroneously attributed to top-down volitional control.

    “In a critical evaluation of the existing literature regarding feature-based attention, Theeuwes (2013) argued that the role of intertrial priming is often underestimated and its influence on attentional selection is often erroneously attributed to top-down volitional control.”

    From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Theeuwes (2013)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Theeuwes, J.
Affiliations
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Theeuwes, Jan
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Published
2013-10-19
Volume
368
Issue
1628
Pages
20130055
ISSN
  • 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2970
OpenAlex
W2152631530
Cited by
168
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
feature-based attention, top-down control, visual search, cueing paradigm, visual field representation, attentional capture
MeSH terms
Attention, Field Dependence-Independence, Humans, Models, Psychological, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Research Design, Visual Perception, Repetition Priming

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review