ABSTRACT

Attentional capture is assumed to automatically trigger attentional engagement, which gates working memory access. However, recent studies show that engagement is not a necessary outcome of capture and can be disrupted by manipulations that leave capture intact. In this commentary, I suggest that these findings have important implications for the capture debate. Mainly, they suggest that capture may have different consequences under different conditions. Moreover, they caution against interpreting the absence of evidence for engagement as evidence that capture did not occur. Finally, they open the door to future investigation about factors that determine and modulate engagement, independently from capture.

摘要

假设注意捕获会自动触发注意参与，从而控制工作记忆访问。然而，最近的研究表明，参与不是捕获的必要结果，并且可能会被保持捕获完整的操作所破坏。在这篇评论中，我建议这些发现对捕获辩论具有重要意义。主要是，他们认为在不同条件下捕获可能会产生不同的后果。此外，他们告诫不要将没有参与的证据解释为没有发生捕获的证据。最后，它们为未来调查决定和调节参与度的因素打开了大门，独立于捕获。