Kyle Cave

Assessment | Biopsychology | Comparative | Cognitive | Developmental | Language | Individual differences | Personality | Philosophy | Social |
Methods | Statistics | Clinical | Educational | Industrial | Professional items | World psychology |

Cognitive Psychology: Attention · Decision making · Learning · Judgement · Memory · Motivation · Perception · Reasoning · Thinking  - Cognitive processes Cognition - Outline Index

---

Kyle R. Cave is a professor of psychology at UMass Amherst. His primary research interest is visual Selective attention, and he also teaches undergraduate courses in Cognitive Psychology and Consciousness.

His most important contribtion is the FeatureGate model of visual selection.

Publications

Papers

• Auckland, M.E., Cave, K.R., & Donnelly, N. (in press). Non-target objects can influence perceptual processes during object recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review.

• Chen, Z., & Cave, K.R. () Reinstating object-based attention under positional certainty: The importance of subjective parsing. Perception & Psychophysics. Full text

• Chen, Z., & Cave, K.R. (in press) When does visual attention select all features of a distractor? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.

• Cave, K.R., & Batty, M.J. (2006). From searching for features to searching for threat: Drawing the boundary between preattentive and attentive vision. Visual Cognition, 14, 629-646.

• Batty, M.J., Cave, K.R., & Pauli, P. (2005). Abstract stimuli associated with threat through conditioning cannot be detected preattentively. Emotion, 5, 418-430.

• Sobel, K.V., & Cave, K.R. (2002) The roles of salience and strategy in conjunction search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 1055-1070.

• Cave, K.R. (2001). Selection can be performed effectively without temporal binding, but could be even more effective with it. Visual Cognition, 8, 467-487.

• Kim, M.-S., & Cave, K.R. (2001). Perceptual grouping via spatial selection in a focused-attention task. Vision Research, 41, 611-624.

• Davidson, H., Cave, K.R., & Sellner, D. (2000). Differences in visual attention and task interference between males and females reflect differences in brain laterality. Neuropsychologia, 38, 508-519.

• Wolfe, J.M., & Cave, K.R. (1999). The psychophysical evidence for a binding problem in human vision. Neuron, 24, 11-17.

• Kim, M.-S., & Cave, K.R. (1999). Grouping effects on spatial attention in visual search. Journal of General Psychology, 126, 326-352.

• Cave, K.R. (1999). The FeatureGate Model of Visual Selection. Psychological Research, 62, 182-194.

• Cave, K.R. & Bichot, N.P. (1999). Viso-spatial attention: Beyond a spotlight model. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 6, 204-223.

• Kim, M.-S., & Cave, K.R. (1999). Top-down and Bottom-up Attentional Control: On the Nature of Interference from a Salient Distractor. Perception and Psychophysics, 61, 1009-1023.

• Bichot, N.P., Cave, K.R., & Pashler, H. (1999). Visual selection mediated by location: Feature-based selection of noncontiguous locations. Perception and Psychophysics, 61, 403-423.

• Cepeda, N.J., Cave, K.R., Bichot, N.P., & Kim, M.-S. (1998). Spatial selection via feature-driven inhibition of distractor locations. Perception & Psychophysics, 60, 727-746.

• Cave, K.R., & Zimmerman, J.M. (1997). Flexibility in spatial attention before and after practice. Psychological Science, 8, 399-403.

• Kim, M.-S., & Cave, K.R. (1995). Spatial attention in visual search for features and feature conjunctions. Psychological Science, 6, 376-380.

• Cave, K.R. & Wolfe, J.M. (1990). Modeling the role of parallel processing in visual search. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 225-271.

External Links

• K.R. Cave's Homepage
• FeatureGate Model