Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > The preview search task

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

The preview search task: evidence for visual marking

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

The preview search task: evidence for visual marking. / Olivers, C. N. L.; Humphreys, Glyn; Braithwaite, Jason J.
In: Visual Cognition, Vol. 14, No. 4-8, 01.08.2006, p. 716-735.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Olivers, CNL, Humphreys, G & Braithwaite, JJ 2006, 'The preview search task: evidence for visual marking', Visual Cognition, vol. 14, no. 4-8, pp. 716-735. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280500194188

APA

Olivers, C. N. L., Humphreys, G., & Braithwaite, J. J. (2006). The preview search task: evidence for visual marking. Visual Cognition, 14(4-8), 716-735. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280500194188

Vancouver

Olivers CNL, Humphreys G, Braithwaite JJ. The preview search task: evidence for visual marking. Visual Cognition. 2006 Aug 1;14(4-8):716-735. doi: 10.1080/13506280500194188

Author

Olivers, C. N. L. ; Humphreys, Glyn ; Braithwaite, Jason J. / The preview search task : evidence for visual marking. In: Visual Cognition. 2006 ; Vol. 14, No. 4-8. pp. 716-735.

Bibtex

@article{26a3b5a3a416471c8d6aeedaf5621d12,
title = "The preview search task: evidence for visual marking",
abstract = "A series of experiments are reviewed providing evidence for the idea that when new visual objects are prioritized, old objects are inhibited by a top-down controlled suppression mechanism—a process referred to as visual marking. Evidence for the top-down aspect of visual marking is presented, by showing that new object prioritization, as measured in the preview paradigm, depends on task settings and available attentional resources. Evidence for the inhibitory aspect is presented, by showing that selection of new items is impaired when these items share features with the old items. Such negative carryover effects occur within as well as between trials. Alternative accounts and the evidence for them is discussed. It is concluded that the various accounts are not mutually exclusive and that the data is best explained by a combination of mechanisms.",
author = "Olivers, {C. N. L.} and Glyn Humphreys and Braithwaite, {Jason J}",
year = "2006",
month = aug,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/13506280500194188",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "716--735",
journal = "Visual Cognition",
issn = "1350-6285",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "4-8",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The preview search task

T2 - evidence for visual marking

AU - Olivers, C. N. L.

AU - Humphreys, Glyn

AU - Braithwaite, Jason J

PY - 2006/8/1

Y1 - 2006/8/1

N2 - A series of experiments are reviewed providing evidence for the idea that when new visual objects are prioritized, old objects are inhibited by a top-down controlled suppression mechanism—a process referred to as visual marking. Evidence for the top-down aspect of visual marking is presented, by showing that new object prioritization, as measured in the preview paradigm, depends on task settings and available attentional resources. Evidence for the inhibitory aspect is presented, by showing that selection of new items is impaired when these items share features with the old items. Such negative carryover effects occur within as well as between trials. Alternative accounts and the evidence for them is discussed. It is concluded that the various accounts are not mutually exclusive and that the data is best explained by a combination of mechanisms.

AB - A series of experiments are reviewed providing evidence for the idea that when new visual objects are prioritized, old objects are inhibited by a top-down controlled suppression mechanism—a process referred to as visual marking. Evidence for the top-down aspect of visual marking is presented, by showing that new object prioritization, as measured in the preview paradigm, depends on task settings and available attentional resources. Evidence for the inhibitory aspect is presented, by showing that selection of new items is impaired when these items share features with the old items. Such negative carryover effects occur within as well as between trials. Alternative accounts and the evidence for them is discussed. It is concluded that the various accounts are not mutually exclusive and that the data is best explained by a combination of mechanisms.

U2 - 10.1080/13506280500194188

DO - 10.1080/13506280500194188

M3 - Journal article

VL - 14

SP - 716

EP - 735

JO - Visual Cognition

JF - Visual Cognition

SN - 1350-6285

IS - 4-8

ER -