The article challenges the traditional dichotomy between top-down and bottom-up attentional control, arguing that this framework fails to explain a growing number of cases where selection biases are not driven by current goals or physical salience. The authors highlight two broad classes of selection phenomena that defy this dichotomy: selection history and reward history. Selection history refers to the bias towards items previously attended, which can occur even when such items contradict current goals. Reward history involves biases towards items associated with previous rewards, which can also occur independently of current goals. These phenomena suggest that a more comprehensive framework is needed to understand attentional control. The authors propose an integrative framework that integrates current goals, selection history, and physical salience into a single priority map. This framework aims to provide a more productive platform for categorizing and elucidating diverse forms of attentional control.The article challenges the traditional dichotomy between top-down and bottom-up attentional control, arguing that this framework fails to explain a growing number of cases where selection biases are not driven by current goals or physical salience. The authors highlight two broad classes of selection phenomena that defy this dichotomy: selection history and reward history. Selection history refers to the bias towards items previously attended, which can occur even when such items contradict current goals. Reward history involves biases towards items associated with previous rewards, which can also occur independently of current goals. These phenomena suggest that a more comprehensive framework is needed to understand attentional control. The authors propose an integrative framework that integrates current goals, selection history, and physical salience into a single priority map. This framework aims to provide a more productive platform for categorizing and elucidating diverse forms of attentional control.