The return of object-based attention: selection of multiple-region objects

Objects can control the focus of attention, allowing features on the same object to be selected more easily than features on different objects. In the present experiments, we investigated the perceptual processes that contribute to such object-based attentional effects. Previous research has demonstrated that object-based effects occur for single-region objects but not for multiple-region objects under some conditions (Experiment 1, Watson & Kramer, 1999). Such results are surprising, because most objects in natural scenes are composed of multiple regions. Previous findings could therefore limit the usefulness of an object-based selection mechanism. We explored the generality of these single-region selection results by manipulating the extent to which different (i.e., multiple) regions of a single object perceptually grouped together. Object-based attentional effects were attenuated when multiple regions did not group into a single perceptual object (Experiment 1). However, when multiple regions grouped together based on (1) edge continuation (Experiments 2 and 3) or (2) part and occlusion cues (Experiment 4), we observed object-based effects. Our results suggest that object-based attention is a robust process that can select multiple-region objects, provided the regions of such objects cohere on the basis of perceptual grouping cues.     

Object-based attention with endogenous cuing and positional certainty

Previous studies have concluded that object-based attention does not always arise if attention is cued endogenously (Macquistan, 1997) or if the target location is known with certainty (Shomstein & Yantis, 2002). In the Experiments reported here, we found object-based attention even when the locations of the two targets were known with certainty due to presentation of an endogenous cue. However, object-based attention can be prevented by limiting the exposure time of the object stimuli. These findings provide additional evidence against a search prioritization account of object-based attention. They lead to a fuller view of the role of object boundaries in directing attention. Object-based attention is frequently used spontaneously, even when the object boundaries are irrelevant to the task. However, object segmentation is not necessary for all tasks, because attention can be allocated before the stimulus has been segregated into objects.     

Object-based selection under focused attention: a failure to replicate

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. While Lavie 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.     

不同注意对视觉工作记忆外部特征绑定的影响

采用变化觉察范式,在工作记忆保持阶段插入客体特征辨别或视觉搜索次任务,探讨基于客体的注意和基于空间的注意对视觉工作记忆外部特征绑定表征的影响。结果发现,与单特征相比,两类次任务均对外部特征绑定的记忆成绩损耗更大。这表明视觉工作记忆中外部特征绑定的表征比单特征消耗更多基于客体的注意和更多基于空间的注意。     

Modulation of object-based attention by spatial focus under endogenous and exogenous orienting

In R. Egly, J. Driver, and R. D. Rafal's (1994) influential double-rectangle spatial-cuing paradigm, exogenous cues consistently induce object-based attention, whereas endogenous cues generally induce space-based attention. This difference suggests an interdependency between mode of orienting (endogenous vs exogenous) and mode of selection (object based vs space based). However, mode of orienting is generally confounded with initial focus of attention: Endogenous orienting begins with attention focused on a central cue, whereas exogenous orienting begins with attention widely spread. In this study, an attentional-focusing hypothesis is examined and supported by experiments showing that for both endogenous and exogenous cuing, object-based effects are obtained under conditions that encourage spread attention, but they are attenuated under conditions that encourage focused attention. General implications for object-based attention are discussed. ((c) 2003 APA, all rights reserved)     

Attentional selection of complex objects: Joint effects of surface uniformity and part structure

What object properties warrant selection by object-based attention? Previous research has suggested that surface uniformity is required for object-based attentional selection (Watson &; Kramer, 1999), yet nonuniform objects are encountered frequently. In the present experiments, we investigated the interplay between surface uniformity and part boundaries and their effect on object-based attention. Specifically, we asked if attention can select nonuniform objects whose surface changes occur at part boundaries. Although uniformly colored objects did exhibit object-based effects, we only observed an object-based effect for multicolored objects when surface changes occurred at part boundaries. These findings suggest that attention can only select nonuniform objects when the surface change occurs at a part boundary.     

Inhibition of return and object-based attentional selection

Visual attention research has revealed that attentional allocation can occur in space- and/or object-based coordinates. Using the direct and elegant design of R. Egly, J. Driver, and R. Rafal (1994), the present experiments tested whether space- and object-based inhibition of return (IOR) emerge under similar time courses. The experiments were capable of isolating both space- and object-based effects induced by peripheral and back-to-center cues. The results generally support the contention that spatially nonpredictive cues are effective in producing space-based IOR at a variety of stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) and under a variety of stimulus conditions. Whether facilitatory or inhibitory in direction, the object-based effects occurred over a very different time course than did the space-based effects. Reliable object-based IOR was only found under limited conditions and was tied to the time since the most recent cue (peripheral or central). The finding that object-based effects are generally determined by SOA from the most recent cue may help to resolve discrepancies in the IOR literature. These findings also have implications for the search facilitator role that IOR is purported to play in the guidance of visual attention.     

Object-based allocation of visual attention in response to exogenous, but not endogenous, spatial precues

Two rectangular objects were presented in the visual field, and subjects’ attention was directed to a location on one rectangle by either an endogenous or an exogenous spatial precue. Similar experiments by Egly, Driver, and Rafal (1994) have shown an object-based effect: slower target identification when the target was presented on the uncued object, even when the spatial proximity of the target’s and the cue’s location was controlled. The experiment reported here showed that this object-based effect occurs only for exogenous cues. Considered in the light of other literature on spatial cuing, it seems that attention is influenced by nearby objects when exogenously directed to a location, but it is independent of such objects when endogenously directed to a location.     

Interference between object-based attention and object-based memory

Research has shown that there are at least two kinds of visual selective attention: location based and object based. In the present study, we sought to determine the locus of spatially invariant object-based selection using a dual-task paradigm. In four experiments, observers performed an attention task (object feature report or visual search) with a concurrent memory task (object memory or spatial memory). Object memory was interfered with more by a concurrent object-based attention task than by a concurrent location-based attention task. However, this interference pattern was reversed for spatial memory, with greater interference by a location-based attention task than by an object-based attention task. These findings suggest that object-based attention and locationbased attention are functionally dissociable and that some forms of object-based selection operate within visual short-term memory.     

Hemispheric performance in object-based attention

The goal of the present study was to investigate whether object-based attention effects differ across the cerebral hemispheres. Previous research has suggested that object-based attention is preferentially lateralized to the left hemisphere (Egly, Driver, & Rafal, 1994; Egly, Rafal, Driver, & Starrveveld, 1994). However, work by Vecera (1994) has suggested that these previous studies may have failed to obtain a pure measure of object-based attention. The present study applied modified versions of Duncan's (1984) seminal object-based attention paradigm. Subjects were typically presented with one target object to a single visual field (one-object display), two target objects to the same visual field (two-object unilateral display), or two target objects to different visual fields (two-object bilateral display). In all three experiments, response accuracy was higher for the one-object displays than for the two-object displays. Most important, this object-based cost was especially severe when selection of two target elements was isolated to the right visual field (left hemisphere). We confirmed that this effect was specific to object-based attention in three different ways: Experiment 1 manipulated stimulus distance, as recommended by Vecera; Experiment 2 ensured that target selection was based on nonspatial attributes; and Experiment 3 used overlapping displays, as in Duncan (1984). Collectively, the data are in accord with previous conclusions that object-based attention is a specialized form of orienting subserved by lateralized cortical brain mechanisms. However, contrary to previous research, it appears that it is the right hemisphere, and not the left hemisphere, that is preferentially biased for committing object-based attention to elements in the visual environment.     

Shifting attention into and out of objects: evaluating the processes underlying the object advantage

Visual cuing studies have been widely used to demonstrate and explore contributions from both object- and location-based attention systems. A common finding has been a response advantage for shifts of attention occurring within an object, relative to shifts of an equal distance between objects. The present study examined this advantage for within-object shifts in terms of engage and disengage operations within the object- and location-based attention systems. The rationale was that shifts of attention between objects require object-based attention to disengage from one object before shifting to another, something that is not required for shifts of attention within an object or away from a location. One- and two-object displays were used to assess object-based contributions related to disengaging and engaging attention within, between, into, and out of objects. The results suggest that the "object advantage" commonly found in visual cuing experiments in which shifts of attention are required is primarily due to disengage operations associated with object-based attention.     

Object-based attention: Shifting or uncertainty?

The contribution of object-based attentional guidance to visual processing is widely accepted, and recent models of attentional selection now include both space- and object-based representations. Nevertheless, although the mechanism of space-based attentional selection has been well characterized, the mechanism underlying object-based attentional selection remains poorly understood. Recent attempts at identifying the mechanism giving rise to object-based attentional selection have put forth two conflicting alternatives. The first suggests that object-based effects are driven by attentional uncertainty (i.e., the attentional prioritization hypothesis), whereas the second suggests that objects guide attentional selection only when an attentional shift is necessitated (i.e., the attentional-shifting hypothesis). Here, we directly investigated which of the two suggested accounts drives object-based effects, by pitting attentional certainty against attentional shifting. In a series of four experiments, we manipulated the certainty of target location, shifting of attention, and the stimulus onset asynchrony. It was observed that object-based effects depended solely on certainty of the forthcoming target location. These results suggest that attentional prioritization, and not a mere shift of attention, gives rise to object-based guidance of attentional selection. In addition, these results lend further support to the attentional prioritization account of object-based attention and provide further constraints on the mechanisms of object-based selection.     

Mental rotation with egocentric and object-based transformations

Two experiments were conducted to address methodological issues with past studies investigating the influence of egocentric and object-based transformations on performance and sex differences in mental rotation. In previous work, the egocentric and object-based mental rotation tasks confounded the stimulus type (embodied vs. non-embodied) and transformation task (egocentric vs. object-based). In both experiments presented here, the same stimuli were used regardless of the type of transformation but task instructions were modified to induce either egocentric (left–right judgment) or object-based (same–different judgment) processing. Experiment 1 used pairs of letters whereas Experiment 2 presented pairs of line-drawings of human hands. For both experiments, it was hypothesized that the mental rotation slope for response time would be steeper for object-based than for egocentric transformations. This hypothesis was verified in both experiments. Furthermore, Experiment 2 showed a reduced male advantage for egocentric compared to object-based rotations, whereas this pattern was reversed for Experiment 1. In conclusion, the present study showed that the influence of the type of transformation involved in mental rotation can be examined with the same set of stimuli simply by modifying task instructions.     

Occlusion, symmetry, and object-based attention: comment on Behrmann, Zemel, and Mozer (1998)

The validity of M. Behrmann, R. Zemel, and M. Mozer's (1998) finding that object-based attention can be directed toward occluded objects is examined in 3 experiments. In M. Behrmann et al.'s (1998) original study, participants made speeded judgments of whether the numbers of bumps attached to 2 arms of an X shape were the same or different. The 2 sets of bumps belonged either to a single object, 2 different objects, or 2 separated parts of an occluded object. Unfortunately, this objecthood manipulation was confounded by the symmetry of the stimuli. Experiment 1 replicated M. Behrmann et al.'s main results using identical stimuli. Experiments 2a and 2b dissociated objecthood from symmetry. The results suggest that the effects of object-based attention found by M. Behrmann et al. are largely due to symmetry. The stimuli used in M. Behrmann et al. are not appropriate for examining the relation between object-based attention and occlusion.     

客体表征质量在语义客体注意效应中的作用

已有研究表明,除自下而上因素外,自上而下因素也能够对客体知觉起到调节作用,从而影响注意的分配。本研究以不同词频（高频和低频）的汉语双字词为实验材料,采用双矩形线索范式变式考察不同语义客体表征质量对基于语义客体注意效应的影响。结果发现,在高语义客体表征质量的条件下出现了基于语义客体的注意效应,而在低语义客体表征质量的条件下并未出现基于语义客体的注意效应。该结果表明,语义客体表征质量的高低是影响基于语义客体注意效应的重要因素。     

Central-cue discriminability modulates object-based attention by influencing spatial attention

The role of central-cue discriminability in modulating object-based effects was examined using Egly, Driver, and Rafal's (1994) "double-rectangle" spatial cueing paradigm. Based on the attentional focusing hypothesis (Goldsmith & Yeari, 2003), we hypothesized that highly discriminable central-arrow cues would be processed with attention spread across the two rectangles (potential target locations), thereby strengthening the perceptual representation of these objects so that they influence the subsequent endogenous deployment of attention, yielding object-based effects. By contrast, less discriminable central-arrow cues should induce a more narrow attentional focus to the center of the display, thereby weakening the rectangle object representations so that they no longer influence the subsequent attentional deployment. Central-arrow-cue discriminability was manipulated by size and luminance contrast. The results supported the predictions, reinforcing the attentional focusing hypothesis and highlighting the need to consider central-cue discriminability when designing experiments and in comparing experimental results.     

Object-based selection: the role of attentional shifts

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 top-down 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 Egly, Driver, and Rafal (1994). 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).     

Can attention select only a fixed number of objects at a time?

Several previous studies have suggested that we may attend only a fixed number of 'objects' at a time. However, whereas findings from two-target experiments suggest that we can attend only one object at a time, other results from object-tracking and enumeration paradigms point instead to a four-object limit. Here, we note that in these previous studies the number of objects covaried with the overall size and complexity of the stimulus, such that apparent one-object or four-object limits in those tasks may reflect changes in the complexity of attended stimuli, rather than the number of objects per se. Accordingly, in the current experiments we employ stimuli in which the number of objects varies, while overall size and complexity are held constant. Using these refined measures of object-based effects, we find no evidence for a one-object or four-object limit on attention. Indeed, we conclude that the number of attended objects does not affect how efficiently we can attend a given stimulus. We propose and test an alternative approach to object-based attention limitations based on within-object and between-object feature-binding mechanisms in human vision.     

Attentional spreading in object-based attention

The authors investigated 2 effects of object-based attention: the spread of attention within an attended object and the prioritization of search across possible target locations within an attended object. Participants performed a flanker task in which the location of the task-relevant target was fixed and known to participants. A spreading attention account predicts that object-based attention will arise from the spread of attention through an attended object. A prioritization account predicts that there will be a small, if any, object-based effect because the location of the target is known in advance and objects are not required to prioritize the deployment of attentional search. The results suggested that object-based attention operates via the spread of attention within an object.     

Incremental grouping of image elements in vision

One important task for the visual system is to group image elements that belong to an object and to segregate them from other objects and the background. We here present an incremental grouping theory (IGT) that addresses the role of object-based attention in perceptual grouping at a psychological level and, at the same time, outlines the mechanisms for grouping at the neurophysiological level. The IGT proposes that there are two processes for perceptual grouping. The first process is base grouping and relies on neurons that are tuned to feature conjunctions. Base grouping is fast and occurs in parallel across the visual scene, but not all possible feature conjunctions can be coded as base groupings. If there are no neurons tuned to the relevant feature conjunctions, a second process called incremental grouping comes into play. Incremental grouping is a time-consuming and capacity-limited process that requires the gradual spread of enhanced neuronal activity across the representation of an object in the visual cortex. The spread of enhanced neuronal activity corresponds to the labeling of image elements with object-based attention.