CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 872Visual Attention and Saliency DetectionVisual perception and processing mechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Perceptual load as a major determinant of the locus of selection in visual attention

Open access
Lavie, Nilli, Tsal, Yehoshua·1994·Perception & Psychophysics
DOI 10.3758/bf03213897
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In this paper, we propose that the debate concerning the locus of attentional selection can be resolved by specifying the conditions under which early selection is possible. In the first part, we present a theoretical discussion that integrates aspects from structural and capacity approaches to attention and suggest that perceptual load is a major factor in determining the locus of selection. In the second part, we present a literature review that examines the conditions influencing the processing of irrelevant information. This review supports the conclusion that a clear physical distinction between relevant and irrelevant information is not sufficient to prevent irrelevant processing; early selection also requires that the perceptual load of the task be sufficiently high to exceed the upper limit of available attentional resources.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/bf03213897

Cites

126 of 126 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In line with the perceptual load theory of attention, a high perceptual load of attention on other material may prevent unwanted distractors from intruding.

    “In line with the perceptual load theory of attention (Lavie & Tsal, 1994), a high perceptual load of attention on other material (in our study: the breath) may prevent unwanted distractors from intruding (Erskine et al., 2017).”

    From Being able to think when caught in the maelstrom - how adolescents used mindfulness when facing exams. (2024) · cites this paper as Lavie & Tsal, 1994

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 127 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. JOHNSTON, w., & DARK, V. (1982). In defense of intraperceptual the- ories ofattention. Journal ofExperimental Psychology: Human Per- ception & Performance, 8, 407-421.
  2. KAHNEMAN, D., & 'fREISMAN, A. (1984). Changing views of attention and automaticity. In R. Parasuraman & D. R. Davies (Eds.), Varieties ofattention (pp. 29-61). New York: Academic Press.
  3. LABERGE, D., BROWN, V., CARTER, M., BASH, D., & HARTLEY, A. (1991). Reducing the effects ofadjacent distractors by narrowing at- tention. Journal ofExperimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 17,65-76.
  4. LAVIE, N. (1992). Tajkid haomes hatfisati vehamuvchanut haphsycalit bekviat mikum haselektzia hakishbit [Perceptual load and physical distinctiveness as determinants ofthe locus ofattentional selection]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Tel-Aviv University, Israel.
  5. LoGAN,G. (1988). Toward an instance theory ofautomatization. Psy- chological Review, 95, 492-527.
  6. NISSEN, M. J. (1985). Accessing features and objects: Is location spe- cial? In M. 1. Posner & O. S. M. Marin (Eds.), Attention and per- formance XI (pp. 205-219). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  7. In H. L. Pick & 1. 1. Saltzman (Eds.), Modes ofperceiving and pro- cessing information (pp. 137-157). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  8. POSNER, M. I., & SNYDER, C. R. R. (1975). Facilitation and inhibition in the processing of signals. In P. M. A. Rabbitt & S. Domic (Eds.), Attention and performance V (pp. 669-682). London: Academic Press.
  9. TIpPER, S. P. (1985). The negative priming effect: Inhibitory effects of ignored primes. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37A,571-590.
  10. YANTIS, S., & JOHNSON, D. N. (1990). Mechanisms ofattentional pri- ority. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 16, 812-825.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lavie, N., & Tsal, Y.
Affiliations
Tel Aviv University (IL)
Venue
Perception & Psychophysics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
1994-03
Volume
56
Issue
2
Pages
183-197
ISSN
  • 0031-5117 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5962
DOI
10.3758/bf03213897
OpenAlex
W2051769625
Cited by
870
References
127
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 45 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 40 · 2013: 37 · 2012: 43
FWCI
1.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Perception & Psychophysics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
perceptual load, visual attention, early selection, attentional resources, selective attention
MeSH terms
Attention, Discrimination Learning, Humans, Orientation, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Psychophysics

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