Abstract:The attentional template is often described as the mental representation that drives attentional selection and guidance, for instance, in visual search. Recent research suggests that this template is not a veridical representation of the sought-for target, but instead an altered representation that allows more efficient search. The current paper contrasts two such theories. Firstly, the Optimal Tuning account which posits that the attentional template shifts to an exaggerated target value to maximise the signal-to-noise ratio between similar targets and non-targets. Secondly, the Relational account which states that instead of tuning to feature values, attention is directed to the relative value created by the search context, e.g. all redder items or the reddest item. Both theories are empirically supported, but used different paradigms (perceptual decision tasks vs. visual search), and different attentional measures (probe response accuracy vs. gaze capture). The current design incorporates both paradigms and measures. The results reveal that while Optimal Tuning shifts are observed in probe trials they do not drive early attention or eye- movement behaviour in visual search. Instead, early attention follows the Relational Account, selecting all items with the relative target colour (e.g., redder). This suggests that the masked probe trials used in Optimal Tuning do not probe the attentional template that guides attention. In Experiment 3 we find that optimal tuning shifts correspond in magnitude to purely perceptual shifts created by contrast biases in the visual search arrays. This suggests that the shift in probe responses may in fact be a perceptual artefact rather than a strategic adaptation to optimise the signal-to-noise ratio. These results highlight the distinction between early attentional mechanisms and later, target identification mechanisms.Significance statementClassical theories of attention suggest that attention is guided by a feature-specific target template. In recent designs this has been challenged by an apparent non- veridical tuning of the template in situations where the target stimulus is similar to non-targets. The current studies compare two theories that propose different explanations for non-veridical tuning; the Relational and the Optimal Tuning account. We show that the Relational account describes the mechanism that guides early search behaviour, while the Optimal Tuning account describes perceptual decision-making. Optimal Tuning effects may be due to an artefact that has not been described in visual search before (simultaneous contrast).

You are not enough: Inefficient search strategies persist for self-relevant targets1

Visual Search May Not Require Target Representation in Working Memory or Long-Term Memory.

The reconfiguration of task set has no effect on the efficiency of feature search

Do we actively inhibit recently attended but no longer relevant information

Self-prioritization of fully unfamiliar stimuli

No difference in prior representations of what to attend and what to ignore

Perceptual effects of social salience: evidence from self-prioritization effects on perceptual matching.

The attentional template in high and low similarity search: Optimal tuning or tuning to relations?

The allocation of working memory resources determines the efficiency of attentional templates in single- and dual-target search.

Investigating the mechanisms by which selective attention affects subsequent preferences and choice

Not all attention orienting is created equal: Recognition memory is enhanced when attention orienting involves distractor suppression

Testing the contributions of proactive target and distractor templates in visual search performance

It is not in the details: Self-related shapes are rapidly classified but their features are not better remembered

Learned Reward Association Acts As "template for Rejection" in Visual Search Task

Attentional Orientation Induced by Temporarily Established Self-Referential Cues

Learned spatial suppression is not always proactive.

Affective compatibility with the self modulates the self-prioritisation effect

Isolating the impact of a visual search template's color and form information on search guidance and verification times

Target-distractor similarity predicts visual search efficiency but only for highly similar features

Gaze Capture by Task-Irrelevant, Eye of Origin, Singletons Even Without Awareness During Visual Search

All eyes on relevance: strategic allocation of attention as a result of feature-based task demands in multiple object tracking