CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 3

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Attention Habit II: How selection history shapes the strategic control of attention

Anderson, Brian A., Lee, David S., Yan, Niya, McKinney, Molly R., Clement, Andrew·2026·Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
DOI 10.3758/s13423-025-02790-7
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The allocation of attention is now widely understood to reflect the joint influence of goal-directed, stimulus-driven, and selection history-driven mechanisms of control. The influence of selection history is often discussed in the context of the involuntary control of attention, competing with goal-directed influences. Here, we argue that selection history also influences voluntary, goal-directed mechanisms of control, shaping the manner in which intentional prioritization of stimuli occurs. In this respect, the habitual guidance of attention is not limited to mechanisms of priority assignment that operate without respect to observers’ goals and intentions; rather, the goal-directed control of attention itself is sensitive to habit-like mechanisms of priority assignment. This has implications for how we characterize mechanisms of attentional control, blurring the distinction between goal-directed and selection history-driven influences and raising important questions concerning the degree to which the intentional control of attention is biased by prior learning.

Overview

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/s13423-025-02790-7

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 153

  1. Addleman, D. A., & Jiang, Y. V. (2019). Experience-driven auditory attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(11), 927–937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.08.002 · DOI
  2. Addleman, D. A., Rajasingh, R., & Störmer, V. S. (2024). Attention to object categories: Selection history determines the breadth of attentional tuning during real-world object search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 153(6), 1568–1581. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001575 · DOI
  3. Anderson, B. A. (2013). A value-driven mechanism of attentional selection. Journal of Vision, 13(3):7, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1167/13.3.7 · DOI
  4. Anderson, B. A. (2014). On the precision of goal-directed attentional selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(5), 1755–1762. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037685 · DOI
  5. Anderson, B. A. (2016). The attention habit: How reward learning shapes attentional selection. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1369(1), 24–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12957 · DOI
  6. Anderson, B. A. (2018). Controlled information processing, automaticity, and the burden of proof. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(5), 1814–1823. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1412-7 · DOI
  7. Anderson, B. A. (2019). Neurobiology of value-driven attention. Current Opinion in Psychology, 29, 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.11.004 · DOI
  8. Anderson, B. A. (2021). An adaptive view of attentional control. American Psychologist, 76(9), 1410–1422. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000917 · DOI
  9. Anderson, B. A. (2021). Time to stop calling it attentional “capture” and embrace a mechanistic understanding of attentional priority. Visual Cognition, 29(9), 537–540. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2021.1892894 · DOI
  10. Anderson, B. A. (2021). Using aversive conditioning with near-real-time feedback to shape eye movements during naturalistic viewing. Behavior Research Methods, 53(3), 993–1002. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01476-3 · DOI
  11. Anderson, B. A. (2024). Rethinking distraction. Visual Cognition, 32(9/10), 959–978. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2024.2335118 · DOI
  12. Anderson, B. A. (2024). Trichotomy revisited: A monolithic theory of attentional control. Vision Research, 217, Article 108366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2024.108366 · DOI
  13. Anderson, B. A., & Britton, M. K. (2019). Selection history in context: Evidence for the role of reinforcement learning in biasing attention. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81(8), 2666–2672. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-019-01817-1 · DOI
  14. Anderson, B. A., & Britton, M. K. (2020). On the automaticity of attentional orienting to threatening stimuli. Emotion, 20(6), 1109–1112. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000596 · DOI
  15. Anderson, B. A., & Folk, C. L. (2012). Dissociating location-specific inhibition and attention shifts: Evidence against the disengagement account of contingent capture. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74(6), 1183–1198. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-012-0325-9 · DOI
  16. Anderson, B. A., & Halpern, M. (2017). On the value-dependence of value-driven attentional capture. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79(4), 1001–1011. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-017-1289-6 · DOI
  17. Anderson, B. A., & Kim, H. (2018). Mechanisms of value-learning in the guidance of spatial attention. Cognition, 178, 26–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.05.005 · DOI
  18. Anderson, B. A., & Kim, H. (2018). On the representational nature of value-driven spatial attentional biases. Journal of Neurophysiology, 120(5), 2654–2658. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00489.2018 · DOI
  19. Anderson, B. A., & Kim, H. (2019). Test-retest reliability of value-driven attentional capture. Behavior Research Methods, 51(2), 720–726. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1079-7 · DOI
  20. Anderson, B. A., Kim, H., Kim, A. J., Liao, M.-R., Mrkonja, L., Clement, A., & Grégoire, L. (2021). The past, present, and future of selection history. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 130, 326–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.09.004 · DOI
  21. Anderson, B. A., Laurent, P. A., & Yantis, S. (2012). Generalization of value-based attentional priority. Visual Cognition, 20(6), 647–658. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2012.679711 · DOI
  22. Anderson, B. A., & Lee, D. S. (2023). Visual search as effortful work. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 152(6), 1580–1597. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001334 · DOI
  23. Anderson, B. A., Lee, D. S., McKinney, M. R., & Clement, A. (2025). Getting a grip on visual search: Relating effort exertion to the control of attention. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 87(2), 670–684. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-025-03024-7 · DOI
  24. Anderson, B. A., Liao, M.-R., & Grégoire, L. (2022). Pavlovian learning in the selection history-dependent control of overt spatial attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 48(8), 783–789. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0001030 · DOI
  25. Anderson, B. A., & Mrkonja, L. (2021). Oculomotor feedback rapidly reduces overt attentional capture. Cognition, 217, Article 104917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104917 · DOI
  26. Anderson, B. A., & Mrkonja, L. (2022). This is a test: Oculomotor capture when the experiment keeps score. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 84(7), 2115–2126. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-022-02545-9 · DOI
  27. Anderson, B. A., & Yantis, S. (2013). Persistence of value-driven attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(1), 6–9. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030860 · DOI
  28. Awh, E., Belopolsky, A. V., & Theeuwes, J. (2012). Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: A failed theoretical dichotomy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(8), 437–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.06.010 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Bacon, W. F., & Egeth, H. E. (1994). Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture. Perception & Psychophysics, 55(5), 485–496. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03205306 · DOI
  30. Bahle, B., Kershner, A. M., & Hollingworth, A. (2021). Categorical cuing: Object categories structure the acquisition of statistical regularities to guide visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 150(12), 2552–2566. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001059 · DOI
  31. Ballard, I. C., Waskom, M., Nix, K. C., & D’Esposito, M. (2024). Reward reinforcement creates enduring facilitation of goal-directed behavior. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 36(12), 2847–2862. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_02150 · DOI
  32. Boettcher, S. E. P., Draschkow, D., Dienhart, E., & Võ, M. L.-H. (2018). Anchoring visual search in scenes: Assessing the role of anchor objects on eye movements during visual search. Journal of Vision, 18(13):11, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1167/18.13.11 · DOI
  33. Botella, J., Barriopedro, M., & Suero, M. (2001). A model of the formation of illusory conjunctions in the time domain. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(6), 1452–1467. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.27.6.1452 · DOI
  34. Braver, T. S. (2012). The variable nature of cognitive control: A dual mechanisms framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(2), 106–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.12.010 · DOI · Paper page
  35. Britton, M. K., & Anderson, B. A. (2020). Specificity and persistence of statistical learning in distractor suppression. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 46(3), 324–334. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000718 · DOI
  36. Britton, M. K., & Anderson, B. A. (2021). Attentional avoidance of threatening stimuli. Psychological Research, 85(1), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-019-01255-6 · DOI
  37. Chang, S., & Egeth, H. E. (2019). Enhancement and suppression flexibly guide attention. Psychological Science, 30(12), 1724–1732. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619878813 · DOI
  38. Chen, H., Swan, G., & Wyble, B. (2016). Prolonged focal attention without binding: Tracking a ball for half a minute without remembering its color. Cognition, 147, 144–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.11.014 · DOI
  39. Chen, H., & Wyble, B. (2015). Amnesia for object attributes: Failure to report attended information that had just reached conscious awareness. Psychological Science, 26(2), 203–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614560648 · DOI
  40. Chen, H., & Wyble, B. (2016). Attribute amnesia reflects a lack of memory consolidation for attended information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42(2), 225–234. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000133 · DOI
  41. Chen, H., Yu, J., Fu, Y., Zhu, P., Li, W., Zhou, J., & Shen, M. (2019). Does attribute amnesia occur with the presentation of complex, meaningful stimuli? The answer is, “It depends.” Memory & Cognition, 47(6), 1133–1144. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00923-7 · DOI
  42. Chen, H., Yan, N., Zhu, P., Wyble, B., Eitam, B., & Shen, M. (2019). Expecting the unexpected: Violation of expectation shifts strategies toward information exploration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 45(4), 513–522. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000622 · DOI
  43. Chelazzi, L., Estocinova, J., Calletti, R., Lo Gerfo, E., Sani, I., Della Libera, C., & Santandrea, E. (2014). Altering spatial priority maps via reward-based learning. The Journal of Neuroscience, 34(25), 8594–8604. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0277-14.2014 · DOI · Paper page
  44. Clement, A., & Anderson, B. A. (2023). Statistical learning facilitates the strategic use of attentional control. Cognition, 239, Article 105536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2023.105536 · DOI
  45. Clement, A., & Anderson, B. A. (2024). Statistically learned associations among objects bias attention. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 86(7), 2251–2261. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-024-02941-3 · DOI
  46. Corbetta, M., Patel, G., & Shulman, G. L. (2008). The reorienting system of the human brain: From environment to theory of mind. Neuron, 58(3), 306–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2008.04.017 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Corbetta, M., & Shulman, G. L. (2002). Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3(3), 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn755 · DOI · Paper page
  48. Cosman, J. D., & Vecera, S. P. (2013). Context-dependent control over attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(3), 836–848. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030027 · DOI
  49. Cosman, J. D., & Vecera, S. P. (2014). Establishment of an attentional set via statistical learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034489 · DOI
  50. Della Libera, C., & Chelazzi, L. (2009). Learning to attend and to ignore is a matter of gains and losses. Psychological Science, 20(6), 778–784. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02360.x · DOI · Paper page
  51. Dennet, D. C. (1984). Elbow room: The varieties of free will worth wanting. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/10470.001.0001 · DOI
  52. Dennet, D. C. (2004). Freedom evolves. Penguin.
  53. Desimone, R., & Duncan, J. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 18, 193–222. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ne.18.030195.001205 · DOI · Paper page
  54. Eimer, M., & Kiss, M. (2008). Involuntary attentional capture is determined by task set: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(8), 1423–1433. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2008.20099 · DOI
  55. Eimer, M., Kiss, M., Press, C., & Sauter, D. (2009). The roles of feature-specific task set and bottom-up salience in attentional capture: An ERP study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35(5), 1316–1328. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015872 · DOI
  56. Eitam, B., Shoval, R., & Yeshurun, Y. (2015). Seeing without knowing: Task relevance dissociates between visual awareness and recognition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1339(1), 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12673 · DOI
  57. Eitam, B., Yeshurun, Y., & Hassan, K. (2013). Blinded by irrelevance: pure irrelevance induced “blindness.” Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 39(3), 611–615. · DOI
  58. Esterman, M., Poole, V., Liu, G., & DeGutis, J. (2017). Modulating reward induces differential neurocognitive approaches to sustained attention. Cerebral Cortex, 27(8), 4022–4032. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhw214 · DOI
  59. Etzel, J. A., Cole, M. W., Zacks, J. M., Kay, K. N., & Braver, T. S. (2016). Reward motivation enhances task coding in frontoparietal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 26(4), 1647–1659. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhu327 · DOI · Paper page
  60. Folk, C. L., & Anderson, B. A. (2010). Target uncertainty effects in attentional capture: Color singleton set or multiple attentional control settings? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(3), 421–426. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.17.3.421 · DOI
  61. Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(4), 1030–1044. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.18.4.1030 · DOI · Paper page
  62. Fu, Y., Guan, C., Tam, J., O’Donnell, R. E., Shen, M., Wyble, B., & Chen, H. (2023). Attention with or without working memory: Mnemonic reselection of attended information. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 27(12), 1111–1122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2023.08.010 · DOI
  63. Gaspelin, N., Gaspar, J. M., & Luck, S. J. (2019). Oculomotor inhibition of salient distractors: Voluntary inhibition cannot override selection history. Visual Cognition, 27(3/4), 227–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2019.1600090 · DOI
  64. Gaspelin, N., Leonard, C. J., & Luck, S. J. (2017). Suppression of overt attentional capture by salient-but-irrelevant color singletons. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-016-1209-1 · DOI
  65. Gaspelin, N., & Luck, S. J. (2018). The role of inhibition in avoiding distraction by salient stimuli. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(1), 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.11.001 · DOI
  66. Gaspelin, N., Ma, X., & Luck, S. J. (2025). Signal suppression 2.0: An updated account of attentional capture and suppression. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-025-02736-z. (in press). · DOI
  67. Gaspelin, N., Ruthruff, E., & Lien, M.-C. (2016). The problem of latent attentional capture: Easy visual search conceals capture by task-irrelevant abrupt onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42(8), 1104–1120. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000214 · DOI
  68. Geng, J. J., & Behrmann, M. (2002). Probability cuing of target location facilitates visual search implicitly in normal participants and patients with hemispatial neglect. Psychological Science, 13(6), 520–525. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00491 · DOI
  69. Geng, J. J., & Behrmann, M. (2005). Spatial probability as an attentional cue in visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 67(7), 1252–1268. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193557 · DOI
  70. Geyer, T., Muller, H., & Krummenacher, J. (2006). Cross-trial priming in visual search for singleton conjunction targets: Role of repeated target and distractor features. Perception & Psychophysics, 68(5), 736–749. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193697 · DOI
  71. Goschy, H., Bakos, S., Müller, H. J., & Zehetleitner, M. (2014). Probability cueing of distractor locations: Both intertrial facilitation and statistical learning mediate interference reduction. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01195 · DOI
  72. Grégoire, L., Britton, M. K., & Anderson, B. A. (2022). Motivated suppression of value- and threat-modulated attentional capture. Emotion, 22(4), 780–794. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000777 · DOI
  73. Hikosaka, O., Yamamoto, S., Yasuda, M., & Kim, H. F. (2013). Why skill matters. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(9), 434–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2013.07.001 · DOI
  74. Itti, L., & Koch, C. (2001). Computational modelling of visual attention. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2(3), 194–203. https://doi.org/10.1038/35058500 · DOI · Paper page
  75. Jiang, Y. V. (2018). Habitual versus goal-driven attention. Cortex, 102, 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2017.06.018 · DOI
  76. Jiang, Y. V., & Swallow, K. M. (2013). Spatial reference frame of incidentally learned attention. Cognition, 126(3), 378–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.10.011 · DOI
  77. Jiang, Y. V., Swallow, K. M., Rosenbaum, G. M., & Herzig, C. (2013). Rapid acquisition but slow extinction of an attentional bias in space. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(1), 87–99. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027611 · DOI
  78. Jimura, K., Locke, H. S., & Braver, T. S. (2010). Prefrontal cortex mediation of cognitive enhancement in rewarding motivational contexts. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(19), 8871–8876. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1002007107 · DOI
  79. Jonides, J. (1981). Voluntary versus automatic control over the mind’s eye’s movement. In J. B. Long & A. D. Baddeley (Eds.), Attention and performance IX (pp. 187–203). Erlbaum.
  80. Irons, J. L., & Leber, A. B. (2016). Choosing attentional control settings in a dynamically changing environment. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78(7), 2031–2048. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-016-1125-4 · DOI
  81. Irons, J., & Leber, A. B. (2018). Characterizing individual variation in the strategic use of attentional control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44(10), 1637–1654. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000560 · DOI
  82. Kim, A. J., & Anderson, B. A. (2022). Systemic effects of selection history on learned ignoring. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 29(4), 1347–1354. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-021-02050-4 · DOI
  83. Kim, A. J., Lee, D. S., & Anderson, B. A. (2021). The influence of threat on the efficiency of goal-directed attentional control. Psychological Research, 85(3), 980–986. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-020-01321-4 · DOI
  84. Kim, A. J., Lee, D. S., Grindell, J. D., & Anderson, B. A. (2024). Selection history and the strategic control of attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 50(2), 204–211. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001194 · DOI
  85. Kim, H., & Anderson, B. A. (2019). Dissociable components of experience-driven attention. Current Biology, 29(5), 841–845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.01.030 · DOI
  86. Kim, H., & Anderson, B. A. (2019). Dissociable neural mechanisms underlie value-driven and selection-driven attentional capture. Brain Research, 1708, 109–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2018.11.026 · DOI
  87. Kim, H., & Anderson, B. A. (2021). How does the attention system learn from aversive outcomes? Emotion, 21(4), 898–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000757 · DOI
  88. Kim, H., & Anderson, B. A. (2023). Primary rewards and aversive outcomes have comparable effects on attentional bias. Behavioral Neuroscience, 137(2), 89–94. https://doi.org/10.1037/bne0000543 · DOI
  89. Kim, H., Nanavaty, N., Ahmed, H., Mathur, V. A., & Anderson, B. A. (2021). Motivational salience guides attention to valuable and threatening stimuli: Evidence from behavior and fMRI. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 33(12), 2440–2460. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01769 · DOI
  90. Kim, H. F., Ghazizadeh, A., & Hikosaka, O. (2015). Dopamine neurons encoding long-term memory of object value for habitual behavior. Cell, 163(5), 1165–1175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2015.10.063 · DOI · Paper page
  91. Kiss, M., Driver, J., & Eimer, M. (2009). Reward priority of visual target singletons modulates event-related potential signatures of attentional selection. Psychological Science, 20(2), 245–251. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02281.x · DOI · Paper page
  92. Kristjánsson, A. (2006). Simultaneous priming along multiple feature dimensions in a visual search task. Vision Research, 46(16), 2554–2570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2006.01.015 · DOI
  93. Kristjánsson, A., & Campana, G. (2010). Where perception meets memory: A review of repetition priming in visual search tasks. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.3758/app.72.1.5 · DOI
  94. Kristjánsson, A., & Driver, J. (2008). Priming in visual search: Separating the effects of target repetition, distractor repetition and role-reversal. Vision Research, 48(10), 1217–1232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2008.02.007 · DOI
  95. Kristjánsson, A., Wang, D., & Nakayama, K. (2002). The role of priming in conjunctive visual search. Cognition, 85(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(02)00074-4 · DOI
  96. Kyllingsbaek, S., Schneider, W. X., & Bundesen, C. (2001). Automatic attraction of attention to former targets in visual displays of letters. Perception & Psychophysics, 63(1), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03200505 · DOI
  97. Lamy, D., Antebi, C., Aviani, N., & Carmel, T. (2008). Priming of pop-out provides reliable measures of target activation and distractor inhibition in selective attention. Vision Research, 48(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2007.10.009 · DOI
  98. Lamy, D., & Egeth, H. E. (2003). Attentional capture in singleton-detection and feature-search modes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29(5), 1003–1020. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.29.5.1003 · DOI
  99. Leber, A. B., & Egeth, H. E. (2006). Attention on autopilot: Past experience and attentional set. Visual Cognition, 14, 565–583. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280500193438 · DOI
  100. Leber, A. B., & Egeth, H. E. (2006B). It’s under control: Top-down search strategies can override attentional capture. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(1), 132–138. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193824 · DOI
  101. Leber, A. B., Kawahara, J.-I., & Gabari, Y. (2009). Long-term, abstract learning of attentional set. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35(5), 1385–1397. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016470 · DOI
  102. Lee, D. S., & Anderson, B. A. (2023). Selection history contributes to suboptimal attention strategies. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 30(5), 1866–1873. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-023-02285-3 · DOI
  103. Lee, D. S., Clement, A., & Anderson, B. A. (2024). When detecting a salient target makes search more effortful. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 153(3), 590–607. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001514 · DOI
  104. Lee, D. S., Clement, A., Gregoire, L., & Anderson, B. A. (2025). Aversive conditioning, anxiety, and the strategic control of attention. Cognition and Emotion, 39(2), 476–484. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2024.2413360 · DOI
  105. Lee, D. S., Kim, A. J., & Anderson, B. A. (2022). The influence of reward history on goal-directed visual search. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 84(2), 325–331. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-021-02435-6 · DOI
  106. Liao, M.-R., & Anderson, B. A. (2020). Inertia in value-driven attention. Learning & Memory, 27(12), 488–492. https://doi.org/10.1101/lm.052027.120 · DOI
  107. Liao, M.-R., & Anderson, B. A. (2020). Reward learning biases the direction of saccades. Cognition, 196, Article 104145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104145 · DOI
  108. Liao, M.-R., Kim, A. J., & Anderson, B. A. (2023). Neural correlates of value-driven spatial orienting. Psychophysiology, 60(9), Article e14321. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.14321 · DOI
  109. Liesefeld, H. R., Lamy, D., Gaspelin, N., Geng, J., Kerzel, D., Leber, A., Geng, Joy J.., Schall, Jeffrey D.., Allen, Harriet A.., Anderson, Brian A.., Boettcher, Sage, Busch, Niko A.., Carlisle, Nancy B.., Colonius, Hans, Draschkow, Dejan, Egeth, Howard, Leber, Andrew B.., Müller, Hermann J.., Röer, Jan Philipp, … Wolfe, J. (2024). Terms of debate: Consensus definitions to guide the scientific discourse on visual distraction. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 86(5), 1445–1472. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-023-02820-3 · DOI
  110. Lu, S., & Han, S. (2009). Attentional capture is contingent on the interaction between task demand and stimulus salience. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71(5), 1015–1026. https://doi.org/10.3758/app.71.5.1015 · DOI
  111. Luck, S. J., Gaspelin, N., Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., & Theeuwes, J. (2021). Progress toward resolving the attentional capture debate. Visual Cognition, 29(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2020.1848949 · DOI
  112. Maljkovic, V., & Nakayama, K. (1996). Priming of pop-out: Part II. The role of position. Perception & Psychophysics, 58(7), 977–991. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03206826 · DOI
  113. Mine, C., & Saiki, J. (2015). Task-irrelevant stimulus-reward association induces value-driven attentional capture. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77(6), 1896–1907. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-0894-5 · DOI
  114. Mine, C., Yokoyama, T., & Takeda, Y. (2021). Awareness is necessary for attentional biases by location-reward association. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 83(5), 2002–2016. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-021-02280-7 · DOI
  115. Moher, J., & Egeth, H. E. (2012). The ignoring paradox: Cueing distractor features leads first to selection, then to inhibition of to-be-ignored items. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74(8), 1590–1605. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-012-0358-0 · DOI
  116. Näätänen, R., Gaillard, A. W., & Mäntysalo, S. (1980). Brain potential correlates of voluntary and involuntary attention. Progress in Brain Research, 54, 343–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0079-6123(08)61645-3 · DOI
  117. Narhi-Martinez, W., Dube, B., & Golomb, J. D. (2023). Attention as a multi-level system of weights and balances. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 14(1), Article e1633. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1633 · DOI
  118. Padmala, S., & Pessoa, L. (2011). Reward reduces conflict by enhancing attentional control and biasing visual cortical processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(11), 3419–2432. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00011 · DOI · Paper page
  119. Pessoa, L., & Engelmann, J. B. (2010). Embedding reward signals into perception and cognition. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 4(17), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2010.00017 · DOI · Paper page
  120. Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335558008248231 · DOI · Paper page
  121. Ramgir, A., & Lamy, L. (2022). Does feature intertrial priming guide attention? The jury is still out. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 29(2), 369–393. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-021-01997-8 · DOI
  122. Raymond, J. E., & O’Brien, J. L. (2009). Selective visual attention and motivation: The consequences of value learning in an attentional blink task. Psychological Science, 20(8), 981–988. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02391.x · DOI
  123. Remington, R. W., & Folk, C. L. (2001). A dissociation between attention and selection. Psychological Science, 12(6), 511–515. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00394 · DOI
  124. Schmidt, L. J., Belopolsky, A. V., & Theeuwes, J. (2015). Attentional capture by signals of threat. Cognition and Emotion, 29(4), 687–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2014.924484 · DOI · Paper page
  125. Sha, L. Z., & Jiang, Y. V. (2016). Components of reward-driven attentional capture. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78(2), 403–414. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-1038-7 · DOI
  126. Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing II: Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and general theory. Psychological Review, 84(2), 127–190. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.127 · DOI · Paper page
  127. Shomstein, S., Zhang, X., & Dubbelde, D. (2023). Attention and platypuses. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 14(1), Article e1600. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1600 · DOI
  128. Small, D. M., Gitelman, D., Simmons, K., Bloise, S. M., Parrish, T., & Mesulam, M. M. (2005). Monetary incentives enhance processing in brain regions mediating top-down control of attention. Cerebral Cortex, 15(12), 1855–1865. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhi063 · DOI · Paper page
  129. Talcott, T. N., & Gaspelin, N. (2020). Prior target locations attract overt attention during search. Cognition, 201, Article 104282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104282 · DOI
  130. Theeuwes, J. (1992). Perceptual selectivity for color and form. Perception & Psychophysics, 51(6), 599–606. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03211656 · DOI · Paper page
  131. Theeuwes, J. (2010). Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychologica, 135(2), 77–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.006 · DOI · Paper page
  132. Theeuwes, J. (2018). Visual selection: Usually fast and automatic; seldom slow and volitional. Journal of Cognition, 1(1), 29. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.13 · DOI
  133. Todd, R. M., & Manaligod, M. G. M. (2018). Implicit guidance of attention: The priority state space framework. Cortex, 102, 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2017.08.001 · DOI
  134. van Ede, F., & Nobre, A. C. (2023). Turning attention inside out: How working memory serves behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 74, 137–165. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-021422-041757 · DOI
  135. Võ, M.L.-H., Boettcher, S. E. P., & Draschkow, D. (2019). Reading scenes: How scene grammar guides attention and aids perception in real-world environments. Current Opinion in Psychology, 29, 205–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.03.009 · DOI
  136. Vossel, S., Geng, J. J., & Fink, G. R. (2014). Dorsal and ventral attention systems: Distinct neural circuits but collaborative roles. The Neuroscientist, 20(2), 150–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073858413494269 · DOI · Paper page
  137. Wang, B., & Theeuwes, J. (2018). Statistical regularities modulate attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44(1), 13–17. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000472 · DOI
  138. Wang, B., & Theeuwes, J. (2018). How to inhibit a distractor location? Statistical learning versus active, top-down suppression. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80(4), 860–870. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-018-1493-z · DOI
  139. Wang, B., & Theeuwes, J. (2018). Statistical regularities modulate attentional capture independent of search strategy. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80(7), 1763–1774. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-018-1562-3 · DOI
  140. Wang, R., Fu, Y., Chen, L., Chen, Y., Zhou, J., & Chen, H. (2021). Consciousness can overflow report: Novel evidence from attribute amnesia of a single stimulus. Consciousness and Cognition, 87, Article 103052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2020.103052 · DOI
  141. Won, B.-Y., & Leber, A. B. (2016). How do magnitude and frequency of monetary reward guide visual search? Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78(5), 1221–1231. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-016-1154-z · DOI
  142. Wolfe, J. M. (2021). Guided search 6.0: An updated model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 28(4), 1060–1092. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01859-9 · DOI · Paper page
  143. 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 featural singletons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29(2), 483–502. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.29.2.483 · DOI
  144. 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 and Performance, 15(3), 419–433. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.15.3.419 · DOI
  145. Wu, W. (2023). Movements of the mind: A theory of attention, intention, and action. Oxford University Press. · DOI
  146. Yan, N., & Anderson, B. A. (2024). Attribute amnesia as a product of experience-dependent encoding. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 31(2), 772–780. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-023-02379-y · DOI
  147. Yan, N., Grindell, J. D., & Anderson, B. A. (2023). Encoding history enhances working memory encoding: Evidence from attribute amnesia. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 49(5), 589–599. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0001096 · DOI
  148. Yan, N., Jiang, R., Ochoa, L., & Anderson, B. A. (2024). Conditioned features are selectively encoded into working memory (p. 3123). Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society.
  149. Yantis, S., & Johnston, J. C. (1990). On the locus of visual selection: Evidence from focused attention tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16(1), 135–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.16.1.135 · DOI
  150. Yantis, S., & Jonides, J. (1984). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Evidence from visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10(5), 350–374. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.10.5.601 · DOI
  151. Yu, X., Zhou, Z., Becker, S. I., Boettcher, S. E. P., & Geng, J. J. (2023). Good-enough attentional guidance. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 27(4), 391–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2023.01.007 · DOI
  152. Zhang, Z., & Carlisle, N. B. (2023). Explicit attentional goals unlock implicit spatial statistical learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 152(8), 2125–2137. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001368 · DOI
  153. Zivony, A., & Eimer, M. (2022). Expectation-based blindness: Predictions about object categories gate awareness of focally attended objects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 29(5), 1879–1889. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-022-02116-x · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Anderson, B. A., Lee, D. S., Yan, N., McKinney, M. R., & Clement, A.
Venue
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2025-12-10
Volume
33
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 1069-9384
  • 1531-5320
DOI
10.3758/s13423-025-02790-7
Cited by
3
References
5
Language
en
Licence

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