Distractor salience An alternative theory proposed to explain Lavie's results is distractor
salience. This theory argues that the salience, or prominence, of a distractor is the primary factor in causing
distraction, rather than the overall load. Lavie's research showed that a high perceptual load will not ignore a distractor if the interruption has a face; however, when researchers Chunhong He and Antao Chen examined distractors, they found that a while a high perceptual load will overlook an unfamiliar interference, it will not remove a familiar distractor, regardless of whether it has a face or not. When attempting to identify features in a distractor, features such as depth, dimension, and size have no effect on perceptual load.
Attentional zoom A second alternative explanation for Lavie's results is attentional zoom, which suggests that the apparent difference between high-load and low-load conditions is not due to the overall load, but instead to the degree of localization of the participant's field of attention. Attentional zoom theory proposes that participants can process distractors that are within their attentional focus. When an individual is induced to have a small attentional focus and the distractors fall outside of the focus, minimal processing of the distractors and interference is seen. Studies done on the relationship between attention control and perceptual load show that while load-level can be influential, it is merely one of many factors to consider when examining attention control and that the physical location of the interference is more impactful to attentional zoom than load conditions. A larger attentional focus that includes distractors leads to a higher level of interference. On average, those with high perceptual loads have greater attentional assets than those with low-loads.
Locus versus efficiency Lavie's PhD supervisor, Yehoshua Tsal, the senior author on the original paper, The review argues that perceptual load theory has been misconstrued as a hybrid solution to the early selection versus late selection debate, and that it is instead an early selection model: selection occurs because attention is necessary for semantic processing, and the difference between high-load and low-load conditions is a result of the fact that selection is efficient in high-load conditions but inefficient in low-load conditions. Benoni and Tsal argue that perceptual load theory deserves recognition not for proposing a hybrid model of attention, but for shifting the focus from the locus of
attentional selection to the more important question of the efficiency of attentional selection. It is undecided amongst scholars if the nature of perceptual load has never been precisely defined, leading to circularity in characterizing load and in analyzing the results of differences in load. ==See also==