Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: a failed theoretical dichotomy
By Edward Awh, Artem V. Belopolsky, Jan Theeuwes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2012
1,425 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Prominent models of attentional control assert a dichotomy between top-down and bottom-up control, with the former determined by current selection goals and the latter determined by physical salience. This theoretical dichotomy, however, fails to explain a growing number of cases in which neither current goals nor physical salience can account for strong selection biases. For example, equally salient stimuli associated with reward can capture attention, even when this contradicts current selection goals. Thus, although ‘top-down’ sources of bias are sometimes defined as those that are not due to physical salience, this conception conflates distinct – and sometimes contradictory – sources of selection bias. We describe an alternative framework, in which past selection history is integrated with current goals and physical salience to shape an integrated priority map.
Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, General Decision Sciences
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9c0b9e0f4f2816667a54838247ff64c24f56673e
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Cognitive Neuroscience
- Benchi Wang
- Jan Theeuwes
- Okihide Hikosaka
- Shinya Yamamoto
- Masaharu Yasuda
- Wolfram Schultz
- Jacqueline Gottlieb
- Peter S. Dayan
In General Decision Sciences
Citations in the corpus
- Robust Representation of Stable Object Values in the Oculomotor Basal Ganglia (2012, background): “, 2009) and humans (Hickey et al., 2010; Kristjánsson et al., 2010; Anderson et al., 2011; Awh et al., 2012) even several days later (Della Libera and Chelazzi, 2009; Anderson et al.”
- Statistical Regularities Modulate Attentional Capture (2018, background): “Instead, these effects are assumed to be the result of effects of recent attentional deployments (i.e., selection history) eliciting lingering selection biases (e.g., Awh et al., 2012).”