Cargando…
Comment on Theeuwes’s Characterization of Visual Selection
Theeuwes (2018, this issue) argues that the classic dichotomy describing the factors that guide attention (bottom-up and top-down) is inadequate and should be replaced by a trichotomy (bottom-up, top-down, and selection history). In contrast, I argue that top-down is a broad category that comfortabl...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Ubiquity Press
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6644922/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31517199 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/joc.29 |
Sumario: | Theeuwes (2018, this issue) argues that the classic dichotomy describing the factors that guide attention (bottom-up and top-down) is inadequate and should be replaced by a trichotomy (bottom-up, top-down, and selection history). In contrast, I argue that top-down is a broad category that comfortably includes selection history. While one can certainly choose to subdivide broad categories, there is no obvious stopping point for such an endeavor; how long can it be before this trichotomy turns into a “quadchotomy”? |
---|