Learned and cued distractor rejection for multiple features in visual search

Stilwell, Brad T.; Vecera, Shaun P. · 2019 · Crossref

DOI: 10.3758/s13414-018-1622-8

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the capacity limits of distractor rejection in visual search, specifically examining whether the visual attentional system can learn to ignore multiple distractor features simultaneously. Previous research indicated that while individuals can learn to reject a single explicitly cued distractor feature (e.g., a specific color), they fail to reject multiple distractors when cued on a trial-by-trial basis. The authors sought to determine if this limitation stems from a general capacity constraint on the number of features that can be rejected or if explicit cueing itself interferes with the learning process. To test this, the researchers conducted four experiments to see if participants could reject the smallest possible set of multiple distractors: two colors. The experimental design involved a visual search task where participants searched for a target letter (B or X) among eight colored distractors. Each display contained two majority colors and two filler colors. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants received explicit text cues indicating which of two colors could be safely ignored ("Ignore" trials) or received a neutral cue. Experiment 1 tested the rejection of two explicitly cued colors, while Experiment 2 compared explicitly cued distractors against "uncued" distractors (colors that were reliably non-targets but not explicitly signaled to be ignored). Experiments 3 and 4 removed explicit cues entirely, allowing participants to learn distractor rejection implicitly through experience with the consistent non-target colors. The results demonstrated that explicit cueing hindered the ability to reject multiple distractors. In Experiment 1, participants exhibited an initial "white bear" effect, where attention was biased toward the cued distractor colors, slowing response times. Although this distraction diminished over time, participants never developed reliable distractor rejection; response times for ignore trials did not become faster than neutral trials. Similarly, in Experiment 2, explicitly cued distractors were not reliably rejected. However, when distractor colors were present without explicit cues (uncued conditions in Experiment 2 and all conditions in Experiments 3 and 4), participants successfully learned to reject multiple distractor colors, resulting in faster search times. These findings suggest that the inability to reject multiple distractors is not due to a general capacity limit on the number of features that can be ignored. Instead, the limitation arises from the mechanism of explicit cueing. Explicitly cueing a distractor initially biases attention toward that feature, creating a bottleneck that prevents the efficient conversion of a positive search template into a rejection template for multiple items. In contrast, implicit, experience-driven learning allows the visual system to effectively reject multiple distractor features. The study concludes that explicit cueing interferes with learned distractor rejection, whereas implicit learning is better suited for managing multiple distractors in visual search.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-25; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• visual search
• inattentional change blindness
• attention selective divided