Search

In visual search tasks, targets are difficult to find when they are similar to the surrounding nontargets. In this scenario, it is optimal to tune attention to target features that maximize the difference between target and nontargets. We investigated whether the optimal tuning of attention is driven by biases arising from previously attended stimuli (i.e., trial history). Consistent with the effects of trial history, we found that optimal tuning was stronger when a single target–nontarget relation was repeated than when two target–nontarget relations alternated randomly. Detailed analysis of blocks with random alternation showed that optimal tuning was stronger when the target–nontarget relation probed in the current trial matched the relation in the previous trial. We evaluated several mechanisms that may underlie the effects of trial history, such as priming of attentional set, switch costs, and sensory adaptation. However, none of the accounts was able to fully account for the pattern of results. Public Significance Statement: Visual search is a common everyday activity. For instance, we often look for objects in a particular color. This task is difficult when the color of the target is similar to the surrounding colors. Observers perform surprisingly well in this situation, suggesting that they adjust attention optimally to maximize the difference between the color of the target and the surrounding colors. However, we show that this adjustment breaks down when observers attempt to find more than a single target. Therefore, to optimize performance, it may be best to search for only one object at a time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Attribute amnesia (Chen & Wyble, 2015, 2016) demonstrates that we may not always be able to spontaneously retrieve a simple attribute of a visual object (e.g., its color) for conscious report, even though the object had just been the target in a visual task. Attribute amnesia has been suggested to reflect a lack of consolidation of the task-irrelevant attribute in visual working memory. Here we tested whether saccadic selection eliminates or attenuates attribute amnesia. Saccade targets have been shown to be preferentially encoded into visual working memory and may therefore be spared. We used simple color pop-out displays, asking participants to indicate the location of the color singleton letter target on each trial either by keypress or by making a saccade toward it. After a couple of trials and unannounced to the participants, we asked for the color and identity of the last target letter on a surprise trial. We found that saccade targets were not spared from attribute amnesia: Participants were as bad in correctly reporting the color in the saccade as in the keypress condition. For letter identity, the effect was attenuated but not abolished when the target was foveated for a short period of time. We argue that the current results do not refute an obligatory coupling between saccadic selection and encoding in visual working memory. However, the encoded information may not necessarily be stored in a manner that is robust enough to persist in the face of a surprise question.

Increasing the density or uniformity of nontarget stimuli appears to increase the saliency of singleton stimuli. Consequently, search times should be shorter. Surprisingly, however, effects of density or uniformity on search times were not always observed in detection tasks. We re-examined this finding with stimuli having two features, color and shape. Half of the participants indicated the presence or absence of a color singleton, and the other half indicated the presence or absence of a shape singleton. Density was changed by increasing the number of stimuli from 4 to 10. We found that the effects of density were either limited to target-absent trials or to target-present trials, which may explain previous failures to observe these effects. When color was the target feature, we found shorter RTs to dense than sparse displays on target-absent trials, but no difference on target-present trials. When shape was the target feature, it was the opposite. Concerning the uniformity of the nontargets, we found shorter RTs with uniform than mixed displays and this difference was larger on target-absent than target-present trials. These results are mostly consistent with the Guided Search Model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In visual search tasks, negative features provide information about stimuli that can be excluded from search. It has been shown that these negative features help participants to locate the target, possibly by attentional suppression of stimuli sharing the negative feature. Attentional suppression is assumed to be reflected in an event-related potential, the PD component. To provide a further test of these assumptions, we presented the color of the distractor at the start of a trial and asked participants to find the other colored stimulus in the subsequent search display. Consistent with attentional suppression, we observed a PD to a lateral distractor shown with a vertical target. However, the PD occurred in this condition only when target and distractor could also be on opposite sides of fixation. The effect of trial context on the PD suggests that the PD reflects a search strategy whereby participants select stimuli opposite to the distractor when trials with opposite placements occur during the experiment. Therefore, the PD to the distractor may in fact be an N2pc to the opposite stimulus, indicating that the distractor is not suppressed, but avoided by redirecting attentional selection to the opposite side. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A salient stimulus may interrupt visual search because of attentional capture. It has been shown that attentional capture occurs with a wide, but not with a small attentional window. We tested the hypothesis that capture depends more strongly on the shape of the attentional window than on its size. Search elements were arranged in two nested rings. The ring containing the search target remained fixed, while a salient color singleton occurred either in the same or in the other ring. We observed that color singletons only disrupted search when shown in the same ring as the search target. It is important to note that, when focusing on the outer array, which presumably required a larger attentional window, singletons on the inner array did not capture attention. In contrast to the original attentional window hypothesis, our results show that attentional capture does not always occur with a large attentional window. Rather, attention can be flexibly allocated to the set of relevant stimulus locations and attentional capture is confined to the attended locations. Further experiments showed that attention was allocated to search elements that were perceptually grouped into "whole" or "Gestalt"-like objects, which prevented attentional capture from nearby locations. However, when attention was allocated to noncontiguous locations that did not form a perceptual Gestalt, nearby locations elicited attentional capture. Perceptual grouping could be based on a combination of color and position, but not on color alone. Thus, the allocation of attention to Gestalt-like objects that were jointly defined by similarity and proximity prevented attentional capture from nearby locations. (Contains 2 tables and 3 figures.)

Reaching to targets in space requires the coordination of eye and hand movements. In two experiments, we recorded eye and hand kinematics to examine the role of gaze position at target onset on eye-hand coordination and reaching performance. Experiment 1 showed that with eyes and hand aligned on the same peripheral start location, time lags between eye and hand onsets were small and initiation times were substantially correlated, suggesting simultaneous control and tight eye-hand coupling. With eyes and hand departing from different start locations (gaze aligned with the center of the range of possible target positions), time lags between eye and hand onsets were large and initiation times were largely uncorrelated, suggesting independent control and decoupling of eye and hand movements. Furthermore, initial gaze position strongly mediated manual reaching performance indexed by increments in movement time as a function of target distance. Experiment 2 confirmed the impact of target foveation in modulating the effect of target distance on movement time. Our findings reveal the operation of an overarching, flexible neural control system that tunes the operation and cooperation of saccadic and manual control systems depending on where the eyes look at target onset. (Contains 5 figures.)

Saccadic reaction time (SRT) is more strongly slowed by target-similar than dissimilar distractors (similarity effect). The time course of this similarity effect was investigated by varying target contrast and analyzing SRT distributions. With foveal distractors, the similarity effect increased with increasing SRT, suggesting that top-down enhancement of target features increased over time. This allowed for successful saccades to the peripheral target, but also entailed larger distraction by target-similar stimuli. Similarity effects with peripheral distractors did not increase with SRT, which we attribute to location-based inhibition containing the growing enhancement of target features. Strong inhibition was likely with peripheral distractors because they always appeared at the same task-irrelevant location. Prior inhibition with foveal distractors was weaker because this would have partially released fixation and entailed anticipations. (Contains 6 figures.)

Do we perceive correctly whether a 2-D object is balanced or unbalanced? What would be the cause of biased equilibrium judgments? In two psychometric studies, we varied independently the characteristics of the objects and the equilibrium states. First, we observed that observers were excessively sensitive to the eccentricity of the object top. Second, we found that the subjective transition from "staying upright" to "falling" occurred "before" the object would have lost balance according to physical laws. To determine the role of naive physics beliefs, we tested the effect of physical knowledge. Indeed, participants gave much less erroneous fall responses, once they were acquainted with the physical law. However, a slight bias remained that could not be attributed to an error in locating the position of the center of mass, as fall judgments occurred even when participants judged that the center of mass was above the object base. That is, participants seemed to act according to the principle that it is safer to judge that an object will fall though it would not, rather than making the opposite error. (Contains 1 footnote and 6 figures.)

In the Simon effect, participants make a left or right keypress in response to a nonspatial attribute (e.g., color) that is presented on the left or right. Reaction times (RTs) increase when the response activated by the irrelevant stimulus location and the response retrieved by instruction are in conflict. The authors measured RTs and movement parameters (MPs) of pointing responses in a typical Simon task. Their results show that the trajectories veer toward the imperative stimulus. This bias decreased as RTs increased. The authors suggest that the time course of trajectory deviations reflects the resolution of the response conflict over time. Further, time pressure did not affect the size of the Simon effect in MPs or its time course, but strongly reduced the Simon effect in RTs. In contrast, response selection before the onset of a go signal on the left or right did not affect the Simon effect in RTs, but reduced the Simon effect in MPs and reversed the time course. The authors speculate about independent Simon effects associated with response selection and programming. (Contains 7 figures and 3 tables.)

When 2 targets for pursuit eye movements move in different directions, the eye velocity follows the vector average (S. G. Lisberger & V. P. Ferrera, 1997). The present study investigates the mechanisms of target selection when observers are instructed to follow a predefined horizontal target and to ignore a moving distractor stimulus. Results show that at 140 ms after distractor onset, horizontal eye velocity is decreased by about 25%. Vertical eye velocity increases or decreases by 1 degree/s in the direction opposite from the distractor. This deviation varies in size with distractor direction, velocity, and contrast. The effect was present during the initiation and steady-state tracking phase of pursuit but only when the observer had prior information about target motion. Neither vector averaging nor winner-take-all models could predict the response to a moving to-be-ignored distractor during steady-state tracking of a predefined target. The contributions of perceptual mislocalization and spatial attention to the vertical deviation in pursuit are discussed.

Visual short-term memory (VSTM) was probed while observers performed smooth pursuit eye movements. Smooth pursuit keeps a moving object stabilized in the fovea. VSTM capacity for position was reduced during smooth pursuit compared with a condition with eye fixation. There was no difference between a condition in which the items were approximately stabilized on the retina because they moved with the pursuit target and a condition in which the items moved across the retina because they were stationary in space. The reduction of capacity for position was eliminated when miniature items were presented on the pursuit target. Similarly, VSTM capacity for color did not differ between smooth pursuit and fixation. The results suggest that visuospatial attention is tied to the target during smooth pursuit, which impairs VSTM for the position of peripheral objects. Sensory memory during smooth pursuit was only slightly impaired.

To clarify whether motion information per se has a separable influence on action control, the authors investigated whether irrelevant direction of motion of stimuli whose overall position was constant over time would affect manual left-right responses (i.e., reveal a motion-based Simon effect). In Experiments 1 and 2, significant Simon effects were obtained for sine-wave gratings moving in a stationary Gaussian window. In Experiment 3, a direction-based Simon effect with random-dot patterns was replicated, except that the perceived direction of motion was based on the displacement of single elements. Experiments 4 and 5 studied motion-based Simon effects to point-light figures that walked in place--displays requiring high-level analysis of global shape and local motion. Motion-based Simon effects occurred when the displays could be interpreted as an upright human walker, showing that a high-level representation of motion direction mediated the effects. Thus, the present study establishes links between high-level motion perception and action.

Observers' judgments of the final position of a moving target are typically shifted in the direction of implied motion ("representational momentum"). The role of attention is unclear: visual attention may be necessary to maintain or halt target displacement. When attention was captured by irrelevant distractors presented during the retention interval, forward displacement after implied target motion disappeared, suggesting that attention may be necessary to maintain mental extrapolation of target motion. In a further corroborative experiment, the deployment of attention was measured after a sequence of implied motion, and faster responses were observed to stimuli appearing in the direction of motion. Thus, attention may guide the mental extrapolation of target motion. Additionally, eye movements were measured during stimulus presentation and retention interval. The results showed that forward displacement with implied motion does not depend on eye movements. Differences between implied and smooth motion are discussed with respect to recent neurophysiological findings.