Abstract
Highly relevant stimuli (such as one’s own name) can capture attention in situations in which one can only partially attend to the environment (e.g., the classic “cocktail party” phenomenon, introduced by Moray, 1959). The present study extends previous findings on selection tasks demonstrating these intrusions of relevant stimuli. Not only can highly relevant stimuli be detected more easily, but attempts to deliberately ignore them will also be hampered, so subsequent reactions to such stimuli will not be slowed. In the experiment, participants (N = 32) ignored the first names of other participants without problems, and they showed slowed reactions to such names that they had ignored shortly before (negative priming task). In contrast, no slowing was observed for participants’ own names when those names had just previously been used as distractors.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Bundesen, C., Kyllingsbæk, S., Houmann, K. J., &Jensen, R. M. (1997). Is visual attention automatically attracted by one’s own name?Perception & Psychophysics,59, 714–720.
Cherry, E. C. (1953). Some experiments on the recognition of speech, with one and with two ears.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,25, 975–979.
Fox, E. (1995). Negative priming from ignored distractors in visual selection: A review.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,2, 145–173.
Grison, S., &Strayer, D. L. (2001). Negative priming and perceptual fluency: More than what meets the eye.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 1063–1071.
Harris, C. R., &Pashler, H. [E.] (2004). Attention and the processing of emotional words and names: Not so special after all.Psychological Science,15, 171–178.
Harris, C. R., Pashler, H. E., &Coburn, N. (2004). Moray revisited: High-priority affective stimuli and visual search.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,57A, 1–31.
Houghton, G., &Tipper, S. P. (1994).A model of inhibitory mechanisms in selective attention. In D. Dagenbach & T. H. Carr (Eds.),Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language (pp. 53–112). San Diego: Academic Press.
Mack, A., &Rock, I. (1998).Inattentional blindness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
May, C. P., Kane, M. J., &Hasher, L. (1995). Determinants of negative priming.Psychological Bulletin,118, 35–54.
McKenna, F. P., &Sharma, D. (1995). Intrusive cognitions: An investigation of the emotional Stroop task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 1595–1607.
McKenna, F. P., &Sharma, D. (2004). Reversing the emotional Stroop effect reveals that it is not what it seems: The role of fast and slow components.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,30, 382–392.
Milliken, B., Joordens, S., Merikle, P. M., &Seiffert, A. E. (1998). Selective attention: A reevaluation of the implications of negative priming.Psychological Review,105, 203–229.
Moray, N. (1959). Attention in dichotic listening: Affective cues and the influence of instructions.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,11, 56–60.
Neill, W. T. (1997). Episodic retrieval in negative priming and repetition priming.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,23, 1291–1305.
Neill, W. T., &Valdes, L. A. (1996). Facilitatory and inhibitory aspects of attention. In A. F. Kramer, M. Coles, & G. D. Logan (Eds.),Converging operations in the study of visual selective attention (pp. 77–106). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Neill, W. T., Valdes, L. A., Terry, K. M., &Gorfein, D. S. (1992). Persistence of negative priming: II. Evidence for episodic trace retrieval.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 993–1000.
Pratto, F., &John, O. P. (1991). Automatic vigilance: The attentiongrabbing power of negative social information.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,61, 380–391.
Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., &Arnell, K. M. (1992). Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: An attentional blink?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 849–860.
Ruthruff, E., &Miller, J. (1995). Negative priming depends on ease of selection.Perception & Psychophysics,57, 715–723.
Shapiro, K. L., Caldwell, J., &Sorensen, R. E. (1997). Personal names and the attentional blink: A visual “cocktail party” effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,23, 504–514.
Tipper, S. P. (1985). The negative priming effect: Inhibitory effects of ignored primes.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,37A, 571–590.
Tipper, S. P. (2001). Does negative priming reflect inhibitory mechanisms? A review and integration of conflicting views.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,54A, 321–343.
Treisman, A. M. (1960). Contextual cues in selective listening.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,12, 242–248.
Tukey, J. W. (1977).Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
White, M. (1996). Automatic affective appraisal of words.Cognition & Emotion,10, 199–211.
Wolford, G., &Morrison, F. (1980). Processing of unattended visual information.Memory & Cognition,8, 521–527.
Wood, N. L., &Cowan, N. (1995a). The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: Attention and memory in the classic selective listening procedure of Cherry (1953).Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,124, 243–262.
Wood, N. [L.], &Cowan, N. (1995b). The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: How frequent are attention shifts to one’s name in an irrelevant auditory channel?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 255–260.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Frings, C. Relevant distractors do not cause negative priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 13, 322–327 (2006). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193851
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193851