On the importance of relative salience: comparing overt selection behavior of single versus simultaneously presented stimuli (original) (raw)
Related papers
In defense of the salience map: Salience rather than visibility determines selection
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2013
In order to test these two models, we performed an experiment in which participants were instructed to make a speeded eye movement to any of two orientation singletons presented among a homogeneous set of vertically oriented background lines. One singleton, the fixed singleton, remained identical across conditions, whereas the other singleton, the variable singleton, varied such that its orientation contrast relative to the background lines was either smaller or larger than that of the fixed singleton. The results showed that the proportion of eye movements directed toward the fixed singleton varied substantially depending on the orientation contrast of the variable singleton. A model assuming selection behavior to be determined by relative salience provided a better fit to the individual data than the absolute processing speed model. These findings suggest that relative salience rather than the visibility of an element is crucial in determining temporal variations in oculomotor selection behavior and that an explanation of visual selection behavior is insufficient without the concept of a salience map.
The effects of salience on saccadic target selection
Visual Cognition, 2005
Two experiments were conducted to investigate the effects of saliency on saccadic target selection as a function of time. Participants were required to make a speeded saccade towards a target defined by a unique orientation presented concurrently with multiple nontargets and one distractor. Target and distractor were equally salient within the orientation dimension but varied in saliency in the colour dimension. Within the colour dimension, the target presented could be more, equally, or less salient than the distractor. The results showed that saliency played a large role early during processing while no effects of saliency were found in later processing. Results are discussed in terms of models on visual selection.
Vision Research, 2011
The present study aimed to investigate whether people can selectively use salience information in search for a target. Observers were presented with a display consisting of multiple homogeneously oriented background lines and two orientation singletons. The orientation singletons differed in salience, where salience was defined by their orientation contrast relative to the background lines. Observers had the task to make a speeded eye movement towards a target, which was either the most or the least salient element of the two orientation singletons. The specific orientation of the target was either constant or variable over a block of trials such that observers had varying knowledge concerning the target identity. The results demonstrated that instruction -whether people were instructed to move to the most or the least salient item -only minimally affected the results. Short-latency eye movements were completely salience driven; here it did not matter whether people were searching for the most or least salient element. Long-latency eye movements were marginally affected by instruction, in particular when observers knew the target identity. These results suggest that even though people use salience information in oculomotor selection, they cannot use this information in a goal-driven manner. The results are discussed in terms of current models on visual selection.
Salience-Based Selection: Attentional Capture by Distractors Less Salient Than the Target
PLoS ONE, 2013
Current accounts of attentional capture predict the most salient stimulus to be invariably selected first. However, existing salience and visual search models assume noise in the map computation or selection process. Consequently, they predict the first selection to be stochastically dependent on salience, implying that attention could even be captured first by the second most salient (instead of the most salient) stimulus in the field. Yet, capture by less salient distractors has not been reported and salience-based selection accounts claim that the distractor has to be more salient in order to capture attention. We tested this prediction using an empirical and modeling approach of the visual search distractor paradigm. For the empirical part, we manipulated salience of target and distractor parametrically and measured reaction time interference when a distractor was present compared to absent. Reaction time interference was strongly correlated with distractor salience relative to the target. Moreover, even distractors less salient than the target captured attention, as measured by reaction time interference and oculomotor capture. In the modeling part, we simulated first selection in the distractor paradigm using behavioral measures of salience and considering the time course of selection including noise. We were able to replicate the result pattern we obtained in the empirical part. We conclude that each salience value follows a specific selection time distribution and attentional capture occurs when the selection time distributions of target and distractor overlap. Hence, selection is stochastic in nature and attentional capture occurs with a certain probability depending on relative salience.
Object-based selection under focused attention: A failure to replicate
Perception & Psychophysics, 2000
In a recent study, Lavie and Driver (1996) reported that object-based effects found with distributed attention disappear when attention is focused on a narrow area of the display. This finding stands in contrast with previous reports of object-based effects under conditions of focused attention (e.g., Atchley & Kramer, 1998; Egly, Driver, & Rafal, 1994).The present study was an attempt to replicate Lavie and Driver's finding, using similar task and stimuli. WhileLavie and Driver's object-based effect in the distributed attention condition was replicated, its absence in the focused attention condition was not. In the two experiments reported in this paper, object-based effects were found under conditions of both distributed and focused attention, with no difference in the magnitude of the object-based effects in the two conditions. It is concluded that, in contrast with Lavie and Driver's claim, the initial spatial setting of attention does not influence object-based constraints on the distribution of attention. A central issue in the study ofvisual selective attention concerns the representational format in which selection takes place. In the last 15 years, numerous studies have investigated whether attentional selection operates within space-based or within object-based representations (see Egeth & Yantis, 1997, for a review). Evidence coming from a wide range ofparadigms shows that the distribution ofattentional resources is constrained by grouping factors other than proximity, thus providing strong support for the object-based view. Using the Eriksen response competition paradigm or flanker task (Eriksen & Hoffman, 1973), several experiments showed that distractors slow response to a target more when they are grouped with it (e.g., by common color or contour) than when they are not (e.g.,
Object-based selection: The role of attentional shifts
Perception & Psychophysics, 2002
The objective of this paper was to investigate under what conditions object-based effects are observed. Recently, Watson and Kramer (1999) used a divided-attention task and showed that unless topdown factors induce a bias toward selection at a higher level, object-based effects are obtained when same-object targets belong to the same uniformly connected (single-UC) region, but not when they belong to different single-UC regions grouped into a higher order object (grouped-UC regions). We refine this claim by proposing that a critical factor in determining whether or not object-based effects with grouped-UC regions are observed is the need to shift attention. The results of four experiments support this hypothesis. Stimuli and displays were similar to those used by . Subjects had to make size judgments. Using different paradigms, we obtained object-based effects when the task required shifts of attention (spatial cuing, same vs. different judgment with asynchronous target onsets), but not when attention remained either broadly distributed (same vs. different judgment with simultaneous targets) or tightly focused (response competition paradigm).
On the spatial extent of attention in object-based visual selection
1996
Abstract A new test was devised to avoid previous confounds in measures of object-based limits on divided visual attention. The distinction between objects was manipulated across a wide spatial extent. Target elements appeared on the same object only when far apart, and appeared close only when on different objects, so that object effects could not be reduced to spatial effects, nor vice versa. Subjects judged whether two odd elements within a display of two dashed lines were the same or different.
Strategic effects on object-based attentional selection
Acta Psychologica, 1999
The same-object bene®t, that is faster and/or more accurate performance when two target properties to be identi®ed appear on one object than when each of the properties appear on dierent objects, has been a robust and theoretically important ®nding in the study of attentional selection. Indeed, the same-object bene®t has been interpreted to suggest that attention can be used to select objects and perceptual groups rather than unparsed regions of visual space. In the present studies we report and explore a dierent-object bene®t, that is faster identi®cation performance when two target properties appear on dierent objects than when they appear on a single object. The results from the three experiments suggest that the dierent-object bene®t was the result of mental rotation and translation strategies that subjects performed on objects in an eort to determine whether two target properties matched or mismatched. These image manipulation strategies appear to be performed with similar but not with dissimilar target properties. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for the study of object-based attentional selection. Ó * Corresponding author. 0001-6918/99/$ -see front matter Ó 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 0 0 1 -6 9 1 8 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 2 1 -9 2 N.