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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kerzel, Dirk, Huynh Cong, Stanislas, Burra, Nicolas
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