Cargando…
Do we need attentional suppression?
Gaspelin and Luck describe the signal suppression hypothesis, which proposes that attentional suppression prevents the capture of visual attention by salient distractors. We will discuss several problems with this proposal. On a theoretical level, we will argue that attentional suppression is a disp...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Routledge
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547733/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34720653 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2021.1918304 |
_version_ | 1784590438141788160 |
---|---|
author | Kerzel, Dirk Huynh Cong, Stanislas Burra, Nicolas |
author_facet | Kerzel, Dirk Huynh Cong, Stanislas Burra, Nicolas |
author_sort | Kerzel, Dirk |
collection | PubMed |
description | Gaspelin and Luck describe the signal suppression hypothesis, which proposes that attentional suppression prevents the capture of visual attention by salient distractors. We will discuss several problems with this proposal. On a theoretical level, we will argue that attentional suppression is a dispensable mechanism. Most effects of attentional suppression can be easily explained by reduced target expectancy at the distractor location. On an empirical level, we will argue that electrophysiological evidence for attentional suppression is spurious because, in key conditions, the P(D) most likely reflects idiosyncratic scan paths. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8547733 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Routledge |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-85477332021-10-27 Do we need attentional suppression? Kerzel, Dirk Huynh Cong, Stanislas Burra, Nicolas Vis cogn Opinions Gaspelin and Luck describe the signal suppression hypothesis, which proposes that attentional suppression prevents the capture of visual attention by salient distractors. We will discuss several problems with this proposal. On a theoretical level, we will argue that attentional suppression is a dispensable mechanism. Most effects of attentional suppression can be easily explained by reduced target expectancy at the distractor location. On an empirical level, we will argue that electrophysiological evidence for attentional suppression is spurious because, in key conditions, the P(D) most likely reflects idiosyncratic scan paths. Routledge 2021-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8547733/ /pubmed/34720653 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2021.1918304 Text en © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) ), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. |
spellingShingle | Opinions Kerzel, Dirk Huynh Cong, Stanislas Burra, Nicolas Do we need attentional suppression? |
title | Do we need attentional suppression? |
title_full | Do we need attentional suppression? |
title_fullStr | Do we need attentional suppression? |
title_full_unstemmed | Do we need attentional suppression? |
title_short | Do we need attentional suppression? |
title_sort | do we need attentional suppression? |
topic | Opinions |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547733/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34720653 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2021.1918304 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kerzeldirk doweneedattentionalsuppression AT huynhcongstanislas doweneedattentionalsuppression AT burranicolas doweneedattentionalsuppression |