Four experiments are reported that investigate the relationship between action–outcome learning and the ability to ignore distractors. Each participant performed 600 acquisition trials, followed by 200 test trials. In the acquisition phase, participants were presented with a fixed action–outcome contingency (e.g., Key #1 ➔ green distractors), while that contingency was reversed in the test phase. In Experiments 1–3, a distractor feature depended on the participants’ action. In Experiment 1, actions determined the color of the distractors; in Experiment 2, they determined the target–distractor distance; in Experiment 3, they determined target–distractor compatibility. Results suggest that with the relatively simple features (color and distance), exposure to action–outcome contingencies changed distractor cost, whereas with the complex or relational feature (target–distractor compatibility), exposure to the contingencies did not affect distractor cost. In Experiment 4, the same pattern of results was found (effect of contingency learning on distractor cost) with perceptual sequence learning, using visual cues (“X” vs. “O”) instead of actions. Thus, although the mechanism of associative learning may not be unique to actions, such learning plays a role in the allocation of attention to task-irrelevant events.