Bottom-up and top-down attention are independent

Pinto, Y.; van der Leij, Andries R.; Sligte, Ilja G.; Lamme, Victor A. F.; Scholte, H. Steven · 2013 · OpenAlex-citations

DOI: 10.1167/13.3.16

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 whether bottom-up (stimulus-driven) and top-down (goal-oriented) attention are governed by a single integrated mechanism or two independent systems. While previous research has identified differential effects of these attention types—such as differences in deployment speed, flexibility, and impact on spatial resolution—it remained unclear if they share underlying neural mechanisms. The authors propose that if the systems are integrated or interdependent, performance on tasks measuring each type should correlate. Conversely, if they are independent, no such correlation should exist. To resolve this, the researchers tested a large, representative sample of the Dutch population using two distinct psychophysical tasks. The experimental design employed a conjunction visual search task to measure top-down attention efficiency and a singleton capture task to measure bottom-up attention susceptibility. In the visual search task, participants identified an upright or downward T among rotated Ls, with the search slope (reaction time increase per item) serving as the metric for top-down attentional control. In the singleton capture task, participants identified a letter within a diamond shape while ignoring circles; the presence of a uniquely colored (red) distractor circle among green circles measured the involuntary capture of attention. The study included 936 participants aged 20–26. Data were analyzed using Bayesian statistics to robustly evaluate the likelihood of correlation versus independence, alongside traditional frequentist methods. Participants with excessive errors or outlier reaction times were excluded, resulting in a final sample of 819 subjects. The results confirmed that both tasks produced typical performance patterns: participants exhibited a significant search slope of 60 ms/item in the visual search task and a significant distractor cost of 20 ms in the capture task, validating the experimental setup. Crucially, the analysis revealed no significant correlation between performance on the two tasks. Bayesian statistics provided strong evidence supporting the hypothesis that the measures were uncorrelated. Specifically, the correlation between search slope and distractor costs was negligible (Pearson’s r ≈ 0.006), and the probability of a meaningful correlation was extremely low. This lack of association held true regardless of whether all participants or only the strictly excluded subset were analyzed. The authors conclude that bottom-up and top-down attention operate as independent systems rather than a single unitary mechanism or two interdependent ones. This finding challenges the view that attention is a monolithic process and suggests that the brain utilizes distinct pathways for voluntary, goal-directed selection and involuntary, stimulus-driven capture. The independence of these systems has broader implications for understanding attentional disorders and the relationship between attention and consciousness, suggesting that these processes may be intertwined differently depending on the attentional mode. The study provides robust empirical evidence that individual differences in top-down control do not predict susceptibility to bottom-up capture.

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 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

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

• attention selective divided