Chapter 11 Attentional cuing

An attentional cue is something that directs one’s attention to something.

Posner, Snyder, and Davidson (1980) showed that when a location is cued, participants perform better at processing things in that location. This is because the participants attentionally selected that location.

A schematic of a location cuing experiment (created by Local870, CC BY 3.0)

A schematic of a location cuing experiment (created by Local870, CC BY 3.0)

Some cuing is almost purely bottom-up, while other cases of cuing are a combination of bottom-up and top-down. Let’s explore some interesting cases of cuing.

Because babies don’t know anything, they can’t go around directing their attention the location of food and other important things based on their knowledge of where they might be, or even what it looks like! They have to rely on bottom-up attention, which is often used by caregivers to direct the baby’s attention. At two months old for example, many babies will turn their attention to a sound.

11.1 Side-eye or gaze cuing experiment: babies

The eyes play an important role in human communication; they are very expressive.

A clip from the TV show 'Good girls'.

Figure 11.1: A clip from the TV show ‘Good girls’.

Most humans start interpreting others’ eyes very early. Babies will not only turn their attention in response to the bottom-up cue of a sound, but also they learn to use the cue of others’ eyes.


Babies’ attention is cued by the direction of adults’ gaze. This was documented scientifically by Hood, Willen, and Driver (1998), who tested 16 infants between 10 and 28 weeks old.

A schematic of the task used by Hood, Willen, and Driver (1998)

A schematic of the task used by Hood, Willen, and Driver (1998)

It might be a bit hard to see in the above image, but on the last screen before the probe, the eyes of the face are looking to the left. In half of trials, they looked to the left, and in half of trials to the right. After that face disappeared, a rectangle suddenly appeared on one side. The sudden appearance of the rectangle tends to attract the infants’ attention.

The question was, would the frequency with which the rectangle attracted the infants’ attention be affected by the direction the eyes before were looking in?

There were two kinds of trials:

  • Congruent trials: the rectangle was on the side the eyes pointed at.
  • Incongruent trials: the rectangle appeared opposite the side that the eyes were pointing at.

Usually, when the rectangle appeared, the babies looked at it (bottom-up attention). When the baby didn’t look at the rectangle, the researchers scored that as an “error”. The babies made fewer errors in the congruent condition than in the incongruent condition.

Results of the Hood, Willen, and Driver (1998) study

Results of the Hood, Willen, and Driver (1998) study

From this result, the researchers inferred that the face’s gaze direction often directed the babies’ attention.

Eye gaze is classifed as a top-down attentional cue. The bottom-up attentional cues are all things that cause attention to shift to the cue’s location. Eye gaze directs your attention somewhere else. This requires interpretation likely involving limited-capacity (bottlenecked) processing at higher levels of the brain. After the cue is interpreted, top-down attention works to direct attention in the direction of the eyes.

11.2 Side-eye or gaze cuing experiment: adults

For adults too, following the gaze of others can be important. In evolutionary history, it made sense to look in the direction other people and animals were looking, because often what they were looking at was important, such as a possible threat, or a food source.

Friesen and Kingstone (1998) conducted an experiment much like that done on the babies. Here are the stimuli they used:

The experiment showed the participants the stimuli at a number of different intervals between cue (cartoon face) and the presentation of the letter. That interval from onset of the cue to onset of the letter is called the “stimulus onset asynchrony”. The task of the participants was to hit a key to indicate whether the letter presented was an F or a T. The variable of interest to the researchers was how long it took the participant to hit the key. The idea is that if the cue directs the participants’ attention toward the letter, the participant will respond more quickly. But the participants were informed that the direction in which the eyes looked was not predictive of the location or identity of the target letter or of when it would appear. Thus, the participants didn’t have any reason to voluntarily move their attention in the direction of the eyes.

The plot below shows the average response time for trials where the participant typed the correct key.

Response time against cue type, for four different stimulus onset asynchronies

Response time against cue type, for four different stimulus onset asynchronies

  • How was the response time different in the cued conditions compared to the uncued conditions?
  • What condition yielded the slowest responses?
  • Why did that condition yield the slowest responses?

These eye cuing effects may be even stronger with a person in the real world. The magician and pickpocketing artist Apollo Robbins explains how he uses eye cuing in this video (I’ve set it to begin playing at the relevant part).

11.3 Technology and media

In the commercial world, there are many companies and media outlets trying to get your attention. They use a lot of what we know about visual attention and cuing to push your attention to where they want you to attend. To draw attention to a company’s logo, for example, they’ll position a face near it, looking in the direction of the logo they want you to read. You may have noticed this on websites as well as on TV commercials.


Friesen, Chris Kelland, and Alan Kingstone. 1998. “The Eyes Have It! Reflexive Orienting Is Triggered by Nonpredictive Gaze.” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 5 (3): 490–95.

Hood, Bruce M., J. Douglas Willen, and Jon Driver. 1998. “Adult’s Eyes Trigger Shifts of Visual Attention in Human Infants.” Psychological Science 9 (2): 131–34.

Posner, Michael I, Charles R R Snyder, and Brian J Davidson. 1980. “Attention and the Detection of Signals.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 109 (2): 160–74.