Abstract
The mind appears to be biased simultaneously toward both expected and unexpected inputs. For example, familiar scenes are usually perceived more readily than novel scenes, indicating the former bias, but a single novel object sometimes pops out from a familiar field, indicating the latter bias. A diverse literature and a computational model converge on the following resolution to this paradox: The former bias is conceptually driven and actually suppresses data-driven processing of expected inputs; in turn, this suppression disinhibits data-driven processing of unexpected inputs, yielding the latter bias. Evidence for suppressed data-driven processing of expected inputs is drawn from studies of perceptual habituation, semantic satiation, memory inhibition, inhibition of return, repetition blindness, primed inhibition, the word-inferiority effect, registration without learning, and both expert- and schema-based inhibitory effects. Evidence for enhanced data-driven processing of unexpected inputs is drawn from studies of the orienting response, mismatch negativity, memory facilitation, both expert- and schema-based facilitatory effects, and perceptual popout. The model, calledmismatch theory, incorporates inhibitory and facilitatory perceptual dynamics and is found to simulate the opposing biases. Implications of mismatch theory for perceptual phenomenology, dynamic systems theory, mental health, and individual differences are also discussed.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barton, S. B., &Sanford, A. J. (1993). A case study of anomaly detection: Shallow semantic processing and cohesion establishment.Memory à Cognition,21, 477–487.
Berlyne, D. (1960).Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Besner, D., Smith, M. C., &MacLeod, C. M. (1990). Visual word recognition: A dissociation of lexical and semantic processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition,16, 862–869.
Biederman, I., Glass, A. L., &Stacy, E. (1973). Searching for objects in real-world scenes.Journal of Experimental Psychology,9, 22–27.
Biederman, I., Mezzanotte, R. J., &Rabinowitz, J. (1982). Scene perception: Detecting and judging objects undergoing relational violations.Cognitive Psychology,14, 143–177.
Bower, G. H., Black, J. B., &Turner, T. J. (1979). Scripts in memory for text.Cognitive Psychology,11, 177–220.
Bransfokd, J. D., &Johnson, M. K. (1973). Considerations of some problems of comprehension. In W. G. Chase (Ed.),Visual information processing (pp. 383–438). San Diego: Academic Press.
Brown, R., &McNeill, D. (1966). The “tip of the tongue” phenomenon.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,5, 325–337.
Cambell, B. A., Hayne, H., &Richardson, R. (1992).Attention and information processing in infants and adults: Perspectives from human and animal research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chase, W. G., &Simon, H. A. (1973). Perception in chess.Cognitive Psychology,4, 55–81.
Cohen, J. D., Dunbar, K., &McClelland, J. L. (1990). On the control of automatic processes: A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect.Psychological Review,97, 332–361.
Coveney, P., &Highfield, R. (1990).The arrow of time. New York: Fawcett.
Cowan, N. (1988). Evolving conceptions of memory storage, selective attention, and their mutual constraints within the human mformation-processing system.Psychological Bulletin,104, 163–191.
Dagenbach, D., Carr, T. H., &Barnhardt, T. M. (1990). Inhibitory semantic priming of lexical decisions due to failure to retrieve weakly activated codes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition,16, 328–340.
Dagenbach, D., Carr, T. H., &Wilhelmsen, A. (1989). Task-induced strategies and near-threshold priming: Conscious effects on unconscious perception.Journal of Memory & Language,28, 412–443.
Dark, V.J. &Vochatzer, K. G. (1992, November). Semantic priming can lead to selective attention. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Psychonomk Society, St. Louis.
DeWrit, M. J. (1994).Attention capture by primed and unprimed stimuli. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Diamond, R., &Carey, S. (1986). Why faces are not special: An effect of expertise.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,115, 107–117.
Drewnowski, A., &Healy, A. F. (1977). Detection errors onthe andand: Evidence for reading units larger than the word.Memory & Cognition,5, 636–647.
Ehruch, S. F., &Rayner, K. (1981). Content effects on word perception and eye movements in reading.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,20, 641–655.
Ewckson, T. D., &Mattson, M. E. (1981). From words to meaning: A semantic illusion.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,20, 540–551.
Farah, M. J. (1989). Semantic and perceptual priming: How similar are the underlying mechanisms?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,15, 216–225.
Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., &Johnston, J. C. (1993). Contingent attentional capture: A reply to Yantis (1993).Journal of Experimented Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 682–685.
Friedman, A. (1979). Framing pictures: The role of knowledge in automatized encoding and memory for gist.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,108, 316–355.
Frith, U. (1974). A curious effect with reversed letters explained by a theory of schema.Perception & Psychophysics,16, 113–116.
Gardiner, J. M., Craik, F. I. M., &Birtwistle, J. (1972). Retrieval cues and release from proactive inhibition.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,11, 778–783.
Grossberg, S. (1987). Competitive learning: From interactive activation to adaptive resonance.Cognitive Science,11, 23–63.
Hadley, J. A., &Healy, A. F. (1991). When are reading units larger than the letter? Refinement of the unitization reading model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition,17, 1062–1073.
Hall, G. (1991).Perceptual and associative learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press.
Hawley, K. J.,Johnston, W. A. &Farnham, J. M. (1993, May).Mismatch theory of novel popout: A computational model. Paper presented at the Third West Coast Attention Conference, Eugene, OR.
Hawley, K. J., Johnston, W. A., &Farnham, J. M., (1994). Novel popout with nonsense strings: Effects of predictability of string length and spatial location.Perception & Psychophysics,55, 261–268.
Healy, A. F. (1976). Detection errors on the wordthe: Evidence for reading units larger than letters.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,2, 235–242.
Healy, A. F., &Drewnowski, A. (1983). Investigating the boundaries of reading units: Letter detection in misspelled words.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,9, 413–426.
Hintzman, D. L. (1974). Theoretical implications of the spacing effect. In R. L. Solso (Ed.),Theories of cognitive psychology: The Loyola Symposium, Potomac, MD: Erlbaum.
Hintzman, D. L., Curran, T., &Oppy, B. (1992). Effects of similarity and repetition on memory: Registration without learning?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition,18, 667–680.
Humphreys, G. W., Besner, D., &Quinlan, P. T. (1988). Event perception and the word repetition effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,117, 51–67.
Jacoby, L. L. (1983). Remembering the data. Analyzing interactive processes in reading.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,22, 485–508.
Jacoby, L. L., &Dallas, M. (1981). On the relationship between autobiographical memory and perceptual learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology General,3, 300–324.
Jantsch, E. (1980). The self-organizing universe. New York: Pergamon.
Johnston, W. A., &Dark, V. J. (1986). Selective attention.Annual Review of Psychology,37, 43–75.
Johnston, W. A., Hawley, K. J. &Farnham, M. (1993). Novel popout: Empirical boundaries and tentative theory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 140–153.
Johnston, W. A., Hawley, K. J., Plewe, S.H., Elliott, J. M. G., &DeWitt, M. J. (1990). Attention capture by novel stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,119, 397–411.
Johnston, W. A., &Uhl, C. N. (1976). The contributions of encoding effort and variability to the spacing effect on free recall.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning &Memory,2, 153–160.
Kanwisher, N. G. (1987). Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token individuation.Cognition,27, 117–143.
Kanwisher, N. G. (1991). Repetition blindness and illusory conjunctions: Errors in binding visual types with visual tokens.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 404–421.
Kanwisher, N. [G.], &Potter, M. C. (1989) Repetition blindness: The effects of stimulus modality and spatial displacement.Memory & Cognition,17, 117–124.
Kanwisher, N. G., &Potter, M. C. (1990). Repetition blindness: Levels of processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 30–47.
Karis, D., Fabiani, M., &Donchin, E. (1984). “P300” and memory: Individual differences in the von Restorff effect.Cognitive Psychology,16, 177–216.
Keppel, G., &Underwood, B. (1962). Proactive inhibition in short-term retention of single items.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,1, 153–161.
Klein, R. (1993, May).On the relationships between overt and covert orienting: A new from human performance. Paper presented at the Third West Coast Attention Conference, Eugene, OR.
Kraut, A. G., &Smothergill, D. W., (1978). A two-factor theory of stimulus-repetition effects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,4, 191–197.
Kraut, A. G., Smothergill, D. W., &Farkas, M. S. (1981). Stimulus repetition effects on attention to words and colors.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,7, 1303–1311.
Lambert, A., &Voor, N. (1993). A left visual field bias for semantic encoding of unattended words.Neuropsychologia,31, 67–73.
Levtne, M. (1988).Effective problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Lewicki, P., Hill, T., &Sasaki, I. (1989). Self-perpetuating development of encoding biases.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,118, 323–337.
Locksley, A., Stangor, C., Hepburn, C., Grosovsky, E., &Hochstrasser, M. (1984). The ambiguity of recognition memory tests of schema theory.Cognitive Psychology,16, 421–448
Loptus, G. R., &Mackworth, N. H. (1978). Cognitive determinants of fixation location during picture viewing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,4, 565–572.
Lorch, E. P., Anderson, D. R., &Wells, A. D. (1984). Effects of irrelevant information on speeded classification tasks: Interference is reduced by habituation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 850–864.
Lubow, R. E. (1973). Latent inhibition.Psychological Bulletin,79, 398–407.
Maylor, E. A., &Hockey, R. (1985). Inhibitory component of externally controlled covert orienting in visual space.Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance,11, 777–787.
McClelland, J. J., &Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part I. An account of basic findings.Psychological Review,88, 375–407.
Myles-Worsley, M., Johnston, W. A., &Simons, M. A. (1988). The influence of expertise on x-ray image processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition,14, 553–557.
Näätänen, R. (1990). The role of attention in auditory information processing as revealed by event-related potentials and other brain measures of cognitive function.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,13, 201–288.
Näätänen, R. (1992),Attention and brain function, Hillsdale, NI: Erlbaum.
Neely, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In D. Besner, & G. Humphreys (Eds.),Basic processes in reading: Visual word recognition (pp. 264–336). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Nickerson, R. S., &Adams, M. J. (1979). Long-term memory for a common object.Cognitive Psychology,11, 287–307.
O’Regan, K. (1979). Saccade size control in reading: Evidence for the linguistic control hypothesis.Perception & Psychophysics,25, 501–509.
Posner, M. I., &Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma, & D. Bowhuis (Eds.),Attention and performance X (pp. 531–556). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Prigogine, I., &Stengers, I. (1984).Order out of chaos. New York: Bantam.
Reason, J., &Mycielska, K. (1982).Absent Minded? The psychology of mental lapses and everyday errors. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Reicher, G. M. (1969). Perceptual recognition as a function of meaning-hllness of stimulus material.Journal of Experimental Psychology,81, 275–280.
Reicher, G. M., Snyder, C. R. R. &Richards, J. T. (1976). Familiarity of background characters in visual scanning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,2, 522–530.
Schmidt, H. G., &Boshuizen, H. P. A. (1993) On the origin of intermediate effects in clinical case recall.Memory A Cognition,21, 338–351.
Schvaneveldt, R. W., &Meyer, D. E. (1973). Retrieval and comparison processes in semantic memory. In S. Kornblum (Ed.),Attention and performance IV (pp. 395–409). New York: Academic Press.
Shapiro, K. L., &Loughun, C. (1993). The locus of inhibition in the priming of static objects: Object token versus location.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception A Performance,19, 352–363.
Sharpless, S., &Jasper, H. (1956). Habituation of the arousal reaction.Brain,79, 655–680.
Shiffrin, M., &Schneider, W., (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory.Psychological Review,84, 127–190.
Slamecka, N. J. (1968). An examination of trace storage in free recall.Journal of Experimental Psychology,76, 504–513.
Smith, L. C. (1984). Semantic satiation affects category membership decision time but not lexical priming.Memory & Cognition,12, 483–488.
Smith, L. C., &Klein, R. (1990). Evidence for semantic satiation-Repeating a category slows subsequent semantic processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory. & Cognition,16, 852–861.
Sokolov, E. N. (1963). Higher nervous functions: The orienting reflex.Annual Review of Psychology,25, 545–580.
Srull, T. K. (1981). Person memory: Some tests of associative storage and retrieval models.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,7, 440–463.
Stangor, C., &McMillan, D. (1992). Memory for expectancy-congruent and expectancy-incongruent information: A review of the social and social development literatures.Psychological Bulletin,111, 42–61.
Tipper, S. P., Brehaut, J. C., &Driver, J. (1990). Selection of moving and static objects for control of spatially directed action.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception A Performance,16, 492–504.
Treisman, A. (1992), Perceiving and reperceiving objects.American Psychologist,47, 862–875.
von Hippel, W., Jonides, J., Hilton, J. L., &Sowmya, N. (1993) The inhibitory effect of schematic processing on perceptual encoding.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,64, 921–935.
Voss, J. F., &Bisanz, G. L. (1985). Knowledge and the processing of narrative and expository texts. In B. K. Britton, & J. B. Black (Eds.),Understanding expository text (pp. 173–198). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wallace, W. P. (1965). Review of the historical, empirical, and theoretical status of the von Restorff phenomenon.Psychological Bulletin,63, 410–424.
Wickens, D. D. (1970). Encoding categories of words: An empirical approach to meaning.Psychological Review,77, 1–15.
Wilson, F. A. W., Scalaidhe, S. P. &Goldman-Rakic, P. S. (1993). Dissociation of object and spatial processing domains in primate visual cortex.Science,260, 1955–1958.
Yantis, S. (1993). Stimulus-driven attentional capture and attentional control settings.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception A Performance,19, 676–681.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
The preparation of this paper was supported by Grant F49620 92-j-0473 from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research to William A Johnston. Some of the ideas for this paper were stimulated by discussions that William Johnston had with José Maria Ruiz-Vargas at the University of Madrid We arc grateful to Veronica Dark, Jim Faraham, Douglas Hintzman, David Sanbonmatsu, and David Strayer for their contributions and suggestions at various stages in the evolution of this paper. We also appreciate the guidance of Jim Neely, the action editor for the paper. and of Nelson Cowan, Tram Neill, and Endel Tulving, the consulting editors.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Johnston, W.A., Hawley, K.J. Perceptual inhibition of expected inputs: The key that opens closed minds. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1, 56–72 (1994). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200761
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200761