Theeuwes, J., & Failing, M. Attentional Selection: Top-Down, Bottom-Up and History-Based Biases

Perception ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 030100662110206
Author(s):  
Alastair D. Smith
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Einat Rashal ◽  
Mehdi Senoussi ◽  
Elisa Santandrea ◽  
Suliann Ben Hamed ◽  
Emiliano Macaluso ◽  
...  

This work reports an investigation of the effect of combined top-down and bottom-up attentional control sources, using known attention-related EEG components that are thought to reflect target selection (N2pc) and distractor suppression (PD), in easy and difficult visual search tasks.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. e16243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Mazaheri ◽  
Nicholas E. DiQuattro ◽  
Jesse Bengson ◽  
Joy J. Geng

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 851-866 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magdalena Chechlacz ◽  
Peter C. Hansen ◽  
Joy J. Geng ◽  
Dario Cazzoli

Visual attention allows the allocation of limited neural processing resources to stimuli based on their behavioral priorities. The selection of task-relevant visual targets entails the processing of multiple competing stimuli and the suppression of distractors that may be either perceptually salient or perceptually similar to targets. The posterior parietal cortex controls the interaction between top–down (task-driven) and bottom–up (stimulus-driven) processes competing for attentional selection, as well as spatial distribution of attention. Here, we examined whether biparietal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) would modulate the interaction between top–down and bottom–up processes in visual attention. Visual attention function was assessed with a visual discrimination task, in which a lateralized target was presented alone or together with a contralateral, similar or salient, distractor. The accuracy and RTs were measured before and during three stimulation sessions (sham, right anodal/left cathodal, left anodal/right cathodal). The analyses demonstrated (i) polarity-dependent effects of tDCS on the accuracy of target discrimination, but only when the target was presented with a similar distractor; (ii) the tDCS-triggered effects on the accuracy of discriminating targets, accompanied by a similar distractor, varied according to the target location; and (iii) overall detrimental effects of tDCS on RTs were observed, regardless of target location, distractor type, and polarity of the stimulation. We conclude that the observed polarity, distractor type, and target location-dependent effects of biparietal tDCS on the accuracy of target detection resulted from both a modulation of the interaction between top–down and bottom–up attentional processes and the interhemispheric competition mechanisms guiding attentional selection and spatial deployment of attention.


2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (13) ◽  
pp. 152-177
Author(s):  
Harri Lorentz ◽  
Sini Laari ◽  
Joanne Meehan ◽  
Michael Eßig ◽  
Michael Henke

PurposeIn the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, this study investigates a variety of approaches to supply disruption risk management for achieving effective responses for resilience at the supply management subunit level (e.g. category of items). Drawing on the attention-based view of the firm, the authors model the attentional antecedents of supply resilience as (1) attentional perspectives and (2) attentional selection. Attentional perspectives focus on either supply risk sources or supply network recoverability, and both are hypothesised to have a direct positive association with supply resilience. Attentional selection is top down or bottom up when it comes to disruption detection, and these are hypothesised to moderate the association between disruption risk management perspectives and resilience.Design/methodology/approachConducted at the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, this study employs a hierarchical regression analysis on a multicountry survey of 190 procurement professionals, each responding from the perspective of their own subunit area of supply responsibility.FindingsBoth attentional disruption risk management perspectives are needed to achieve supply resilience, and neither is superior in terms of achieving supply resilience. Both the efficiency of the top down and exposure to the unexpected with the bottom up are needed – to a balanced degree – for improved supply resilience.Practical implicationsThe results encourage firms to purposefully develop their supply risk management practices, first, to include both perspectives and, second, to avoid biases in attentional selection for disruption detection. Ensuring a more balanced approach may allow firms to improve their supply resilience.Originality/valueThe results contribute to the understanding of the microfoundations that underpin firms' operational capabilities for supply risk and disruption management and possible attentional biases.


PsycCRITIQUES ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 50 (19) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Cole
Keyword(s):  
Top Down ◽  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document