Reassessing the evidence for novel popout.

It is conceded that most of the evidence is not decisive with respect to whether the effects associated with novel popout reflect perceptual or retrieval biases toward novel singletons and that innovative methodologies and converging lines of evidence could help resolve this issue.

Abstract

J. Christie and R. Klein (1996) have reviewed some of our previously published evidence for novel popout (i.e., the possible attention-capturing power of unexpected or novel singletons in otherwise expected or familiar fields). They have questioned the reliability of some of the evidence and suggested that it, in any case, does not compel an attention-capture interpretation. In this rejoinder, we bolster the evidence with more recent data and argue that Christie and Klein's alternative interpretations are deficient on both empirical and theoretical grounds. However, we concede (a) that most of the evidence is not decisive with respect to whether the effects associated with novel popout reflect perceptual or retrieval (or both) biases toward novel singletons and (b) that innovative methodologies and converging lines of evidence could help resolve this issue.