Configural and contextual prioritization in object-based attention

When attention is directed to a location within an object, other locations within that object also enjoy an attentional advantage. Recently we demonstrated that this object-based advantage is mediated by increased attentional priority assigned to locations within an already attended object and not to early sensory enhancement due to the "spread" of attention within the attended object (Shomstein & Yantis, 2002). At least two factors might contribute to the assignment of attentional priority, one related to the configuration of objects in a scene and the other related to the probability of target appearance in each location imposed by task contingencies. We investigated the relative contribution of these factors by cuing one end of one of a pair of rectangles; a subsequent target appeared most often in the cued location. We manipulated attentional priority setting by varying (1) the probability that a target would appear in each of two uncued locations and (2) the cue to target stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA). On invalidly cued trials, the target appeared in the high-probability location (defined by an absolute spatial location, e.g., upper right) 83% of the time and in the low-probability location (e.g., lower left) 17% of the time. In both conditions, uncued targets appeared in the cued object half the time and in the uncued object half the time. At short SOAs, the same-object and probability effects were approximately additive. However, at longer SOAs, the same-object effects disappeared, and reaction times depended exclusively on location probability. These results suggest that observers adopt an implicit configural scanning strategy (in which unattended locations within an attended object have high priority) or an implicit contextual scanning strategy (in which objectively high-probability locations have high priority) depending on task contingencies and the amount of time that is available to deploy attention.     

The role of closure in defining the “objects” of object-based attention

Many recent studies have concluded that the underlying units of visual attention are often discrete objects whose boundaries constrain the allocation of attention. However, relatively few studies have explored the particular stimulus cues that determine what counts as an “object” of attention. We explore this issue in the context of the two-rectangles stimuli previously used by many investigators. We first show, using both spatial-cuing and divided-attention paradigms, that same-object advantages occur even when the ends of the two rectangles are not drawn. This is consistent with previous reports that have emphasized the importance of individual contours in guiding attention, and our study shows that such effects can occur in displays that also contain grouping cues. In our divided-attention experiment, however, this contour-driven same-object advantage was significantly weaker than that obtained with the standard stimulus, with the added cue of closure—demonstrating that contour-based processes are not the whole story. These results confirm and extend the observation that same-object advantages can be observed even without full-fledged objects. At the same time, however, these studies show that boundary closure—one of the most important cues to objecthood per se—can directly influence attention. We conclude that object-based attention is not an all-or-nothing phenomenon; object-based effects can be independently strengthened or weakened by multiple cues to objecthood.     

The role of closure in defining the "objects" of object-based attention

Many recent studies have concluded that the underlying units of visual attention are often discrete objects whose boundaries constrain the allocation of attention. However, relatively few studies have explored the particular stimulus cues that determine what counts as an "object" of attention. We explore this issue in the context of the two-rectangles stimuli previously used by many investigators. We first show, using both spatial-cuing and divided-attention paradigms, that same-object advantages occur even when the ends of the two rectangles are not drawn. This is consistent with previous reports that have emphasized the importance of individual contours in guiding attention, and our study shows that such effects can occur in displays that also contain grouping cues. In our divided-attention experiment, however, this contour-driven same-object advantage was significantly weaker than that obtained with the standard stimulus, with the added cue of closure--demonstrating that contour-based processes are not the whole story. These results confirm and extend the observation that same-object advantages can be observed even without full-fledged objects. At the same time, however, these studies show that boundary closure-one of the most important cues to objecthood per se-can directly influence attention. We conclude that object-based attention is not an all-or-nothing phenomenon; object-based effects can be independently strengthened or weakened by multiple cues to objecthood.     

Object-based attentional selection and awareness of objects

This study examined whether object-based attentional selection depends on the observer's awareness of objects, using objects defined by perceptual completion. As an indicator of object-based attention, we studied the same-object advantage, where observers respond faster to a target within a cued object than within a noncued object. The same-object advantage was not found in the condition where observers were unaware of the objects (inattentional blindness). On the other hand, the same-object advantage was observed in the condition where observers were aware of the objects. These results suggest that the intensity of object representations can be influenced by observers’ awareness of objects, which affects the occurrence of object-based effects. We propose that attention/inattention (or awareness/unawareness) is graded and observers’ awareness of the objects might serve to boost an otherwise noisy/low signal representation for obtaining object-based effects.     

The objects of visuospatial short-term memory: Perceptual organization and change detection

We used a colour change-detection paradigm where participants were required to remember colours of six equally spaced circles. Items were superimposed on a background so as to perceptually group them within (a) an intact ring-shaped object, (b) a physically segmented but perceptually completed ring-shaped object, or (c) a corresponding background segmented into three arc-shaped objects. A nonpredictive cue at the location of one of the circles was followed by the memory items, which in turn were followed by a test display containing a probe indicating the circle to be judged same/different. Reaction times for correct responses revealed a same-object advantage; correct responses were faster to probes on the same object as the cue than to equidistant probes on a segmented object. This same-object advantage was identical for physically and perceptually completed objects, but was only evident in reaction times, and not in accuracy measures. Not only, therefore, is it important to consider object-level perceptual organization of stimulus elements when assessing the influence of a range of factors (e.g., number and complexity of elements) in visuospatial short-term memory, but a more detailed picture of the structure of information in memory may be revealed by measuring speed as well as accuracy.     

Retrospective cues based on object features improve visual working memory performance in older adults

Research with younger adults has shown that retrospective cues can be used to orient top-down attention toward relevant items in working memory. We examined whether older adults could take advantage of these cues to improve memory performance. Younger and older adults were presented with visual arrays of five colored shapes; during maintenance, participants were presented either with an informative cue based on an object feature (here, object shape or color) that would be probed, or with an uninformative, neutral cue. Although older adults were less accurate overall, both age groups benefited from the presentation of an informative, feature-based cue relative to a neutral cue. Surprisingly, we also observed differences in the effectiveness of shape versus color cues and their effects upon post-cue memory load. These results suggest that older adults can use top-down attention to remove irrelevant items from visual working memory, provided that task-relevant features function as cues.     

Inhibition of return exaggerates change blindness

Peripheral cues trigger attention shifts, which facilitate perceptual processing and enhance visual awareness. However, this facilitation is superseded by an inhibition of return (IOR) effect, which biases attention away from the cued location. While the link between facilitatory effects of visual attention and awareness is well established, no study has reported negative effects of spatial cueing on visual awareness. This failure is puzzling, given the claim that attention is a necessary precondition for awareness. If attention is necessary for awareness, inhibiting attention should also inhibit awareness. This leads to a slightly counterintuitive prediction: Spatial cueing will inhibit awareness at long cue–target latencies. This study shows that subliminal peripheral cues exaggerate change blindness at long cue–change latencies, demonstrating that IOR can suppress visual awareness of changes and suggesting that IOR can directly affect the contents of consciousness.     

线索类型对阈下注视线索效应的影响

实验结合连续闪烁抑制范式和线索化范式, 通过操纵直视面孔和斜视面孔的呈现方式, 考察了动静线索类型对注视线索效应的影响。结果表明：两种线索在阈上条件都能产生注视线索效应, 且动态线索诱发的效应更大; 无意识条件下有且仅有动态注视线索能诱发注视线索效应。这说明眼睛运动是产生阈下注视线索效应的必要条件; 眼睛运动会增强阈上注视线索效应, 静态注视线索效应依赖于意识。研究结果支持了社会知觉与心理理论交互模型。     

Reflexive orienting to gaze is not luminance dependent

In the investigation of reflexive orienting to cues, two major theories have emerged: One proposes that transients created by the cue trigger attentional shifts, whereas the other argues that object changes are responsible for instigating orienting. In the present study, we examined whether luminance transients produced by the cue can generate reflexive orienting to gaze. Using a temporal order judgment paradigm under luminant or subjectively equiluminant conditions, participants judged which of two peripheral targets onset first. An uninformative gaze cue served to reflexively shift attention toward one object location, thereby temporally prioritizing the target presented there. The results revealed that attention was successfully shifted toward the cued object, as was evidenced by the participants’ selecting the cued object as appearing first significantly more often than the uncued object, even when the two onset simultaneously. Critically, the results were comparable across luminance conditions. Our findings reveal that luminance transients are not necessary for triggering orienting to gaze cues. We suggest that the orienting observed here can be better explained via an object-based hypothesis whereby object changes, not transients, trigger reflexive orienting.     

Modulation of auditory spatial attention by visual emotional cues: differential effects of attentional engagement and disengagement for pleasant and unpleasant cues

Previous research has demonstrated that threatening, compared to neutral pictures, can bias attention towards non-emotional auditory targets. Here we investigated which subcomponents of attention contributed to the influence of emotional visual stimuli on auditory spatial attention. Participants indicated the location of an auditory target, after brief (250 ms) presentation of a spatially non-predictive peripheral visual cue. Responses to targets were faster at the location of the preceding visual cue, compared to at the opposite location (cue validity effect). The cue validity effect was larger for targets following pleasant and unpleasant cues compared to neutral cues, for right-sided targets. For unpleasant cues, the crossmodal cue validity effect was driven by delayed attentional disengagement, and for pleasant cues, it was driven by enhanced engagement. We conclude that both pleasant and unpleasant visual cues influence the distribution of attention across modalities and that the associated attentional mechanisms depend on the valence of the visual cue.     

Inhibition of return is unimpressed by emotional cues

Inhibition of return (IOR) is a phenomenon observed when a target unexpectedly appears in the place of a preceding cue: With long cue–target stimulus onset asynchronies, reaction times are longer than for targets that appear in an alternative location. Cognitive theories of anxiety suppose that the IOR effect diminishes with threatening, biologically relevant cues because these catch and hold attention. To test this hypothesis, we conducted three experiments, in which emotional valence of cues (animals or facial expressions) had no influence on the strength of the IOR effect, neither in an unselected sample of students nor in highly spider-fearful or socially anxious participants. Inhibition of return appears to be a robust effect, blind to cue valence.     

Simon effect with and without awareness of the accessory stimulus

The authors investigated whether a Simon effect could be observed in an accessory-stimulus Simon task when participants were unaware of the task-irrelevant accessory cue. In Experiment 1A a central visual target was accompanied by a suprathreshold visual lateral cue. A regular Simon effect (i.e., faster cue-response corresponding reaction times [RTs]) was found. Experiment 1B demonstrated that this effect cannot be attributed to perceptual grouping of the target and cue. Experiments 2A, 2B, and 2C showed a reverse Simon effect (i.e., faster noncorresponding RTs) when participants were not aware of the cue. In this condition, the Simon effect would occur relative to the reorientation of attention from the cue, which would initially capture attention, toward the target. This conclusion is supported by the results of Experiments 3A and 3B, in which the reorientation of attention was induced by having the target flash after its onset. With suprathreshold cues either a reverse or regular Simon effect was observed by using a 100-ms or > or = 200-ms onset flashing interval, respectively, whereas with subthreshold cues a reverse Simon effect was found irrespective of the interval length.     

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)     

The role of space and time in object-based visual search

Recently we have provided evidence that observers more readily select a target from a visual search display if the motion trajectory of the display object suggests that the observer has dealt with it before. Here we test the prediction that this object-based memory effect on search breaks down if the spatiotemporal trajectory is disrupted. Observers searched a display for a target shape among multiple distractors. The entire search display then passed behind an occluder and reemerged in either the same or a different configuration. Experiment 1 shows that the same-object benefit for selection disappears whenever a spatial disruption is involved, but that it may survive a brief temporal disruption. Experiment 2 shows that with sufficiently long gaps, a temporal disruption also destroys the same-object benefit for selective attention. Experiment 3 demonstrates that the same-object effect is even stronger when there only is a very small probability that the target can be found at the same location as before. This also made the task sensitive to brief temporal disruptions. We conclude that a coherent spatiotemporal history of a display object supports the selection of its relevant subregions.     

Eye gaze versus arrows as spatial cues: two qualitatively different modes of attentional selection

This study aimed to evaluate the type of attentional selection (location- and/or object-based) triggered by two different types of central noninformative cues: eye gaze and arrows. Two rectangular objects were presented in the visual field, and subjects' attention was directed to the end of a rectangle via the observation of noninformative directional arrows or eye gaze. Similar experiments with peripheral cues have shown an object-based effect: faster target identification when the target is presented on the cued object as compared to the uncued object, even when the distance between target and cue was the same. The three reported experiments aimed to compare the location- and object-based attentional orienting observed with arrows and eye gaze, in order to dissociate the orienting mechanisms underlying the two types of orienting cues. Results showed similar cueing effects on the cued versus oppositely cued locations for the two cue types, replicating several studies with nonpredictive gaze and arrow cues. However, a pure object-based effect occurred only when an arrow cue was presented, whereas a pure location-based effect was only found for eye-gaze cues. It is suggested that attention is nonspecifically directed to nearby objects when a noninformative arrow is used as cue, whereas it is selectively directed to a specific cued location when noninformative eye gaze is used. This may be mediated by theory of mind mechanisms.     

Action-related objects influence the distribution of visuospatial attention

Previous studies have shown that attention is drawn to the location of manipulable objects and is distributed across pairs of objects that are positioned for action. Here, we investigate whether central, action-related objects can cue attention to peripheral targets. Experiment 1 compared the effect of uninformative arrow and object cues on a letter discrimination task. Arrow cues led to spatial-cueing benefits across a range of stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs: 0 ms, 120 ms, 400 ms), but object-cueing benefits were slow to build and were only significant at the 400-ms SOA. Similar results were found in Experiment 2, in which the targets were objects that could be either congruent or incongruent with the cue (e.g., screwdriver and screw versus screwdriver and glass). Cueing benefits were not influenced by the congruence between the cue and target, suggesting that the cueing effects reflected the action implied by the central object, not the interaction between the objects. For Experiment 3 participants decided whether the cue and target objects were related. Here, the interaction between congruent (but not incongruent) targets led to significant cueing/positioning benefits at all three SOAs. Reduced cueing benefits were obtained in all three experiments when the object cue did not portray a legitimate action (e.g., a bottle pointing towards an upper location, since a bottle cannot pour upwards), suggesting that it is the perceived action that is critical, rather than the structural properties of individual objects. The data suggest that affordance for action modulates the allocation of visual attention.     

Action-related objects influence the distribution of visuospatial attention

Previous studies have shown that attention is drawn to the location of manipulable objects and is distributed across pairs of objects that are positioned for action. Here, we investigate whether central, action-related objects can cue attention to peripheral targets. Experiment 1 compared the effect of uninformative arrow and object cues on a letter discrimination task. Arrow cues led to spatial-cueing benefits across a range of stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs: 0?ms, 120?ms, 400?ms), but object-cueing benefits were slow to build and were only significant at the 400-ms SOA. Similar results were found in Experiment 2, in which the targets were objects that could be either congruent or incongruent with the cue (e.g., screwdriver and screw versus screwdriver and glass). Cueing benefits were not influenced by the congruence between the cue and target, suggesting that the cueing effects reflected the action implied by the central object, not the interaction between the objects. For Experiment 3 participants decided whether the cue and target objects were related. Here, the interaction between congruent (but not incongruent) targets led to significant cueing/positioning benefits at all three SOAs. Reduced cueing benefits were obtained in all three experiments when the object cue did not portray a legitimate action (e.g., a bottle pointing towards an upper location, since a bottle cannot pour upwards), suggesting that it is the perceived action that is critical, rather than the structural properties of individual objects. The data suggest that affordance for action modulates the allocation of visual attention.     

Transient attention degrades perceived apparent motion

Transient spatial attention refers to the automatic selection of a location that is driven by the stimulus rather than a voluntary decision. Apparent motion is an illusory motion created by stationary stimuli that are presented successively at different locations. In this study we explored the effects of transient attention on apparent motion. The motion target presentation was preceded by either valid attentional cues that attract attention to the target location in advance (experiments 1-4), neutral cues that do not indicate a location (experiments 1, 3, and 4), or invalid cues that direct attention to a non-target location (experiment 2). Valid attentional cues usually improve performance in various tasks. Here, however, an attentional impairment was found. Observers' ability to discriminate the direction of motion diminished at the cued location. Analogous results were obtained regardless of cue type: singleton cue (experiment 1), central non-informative cue (experiment 2), or abrupt onset cue (experiment 3). Experiment 4 further demonstrated that reversed apparent motion is less likely with attention. This seemingly counterintuitive attentional degradation of perceived apparent motion is consistent with several recent findings, and together they suggest that transient attention facilitates spatial segregation and temporal integration but impairs spatial integration and temporal segregation.     

Structure-based modulation of inhibition of return is triggered by object-internal but not occluding shape features

When attention is oriented to an object it is inhibited from returning to the same object following a short delay. This inhibition-of-return (IOR) effect is modulated by an edge discontinuity presented between cue and target—an effect referred to as structure-based modulation of IOR. Here we examined two alternative accounts for the structure-based modulation effect. On one account the modulation is caused by the presence of any intervening feature between cue and target. On another account the modulation is caused by edge-bounded (i.e., closed) regions of space, on which space-based selection mechanisms operate. We presented cues and targets on unsegmented and internally or externally segmented rectangles to examine the two alternative accounts for the effect. Contrary to the predictions of the two alternative accounts, structure-based modulation of IOR was found with the internally but not with the externally segmented displays. This supports our hypothesis that object-based IOR arises from perceptually complete and internally structured object representations.     

Structure-based modulation of inhibition of return is triggered by object-internal but not occluding shape features

When attention is oriented to an object it is inhibited from returning to the same object following a short delay. This inhibition-of-return (IOR) effect is modulated by an edge discontinuity presented between cue and target—an effect referred to as structure-based modulation of IOR. Here we examined two alternative accounts for the structure-based modulation effect. On one account the modulation is caused by the presence of any intervening feature between cue and target. On another account the modulation is caused by edge-bounded (i.e., closed) regions of space, on which space-based selection mechanisms operate. We presented cues and targets on unsegmented and internally or externally segmented rectangles to examine the two alternative accounts for the effect. Contrary to the predictions of the two alternative accounts, structure-based modulation of IOR was found with the internally but not with the externally segmented displays. This supports our hypothesis that object-based IOR arises from perceptually complete and internally structured object representations.