Offsets and prioritizing the selection of new elements in search displays: More evidence for attentional capture in the preview effect

The preview effect refers to the finding that new elements in a search display are prioritized over old elements. Donk and Theeuwes (2001) suggest that this prioritization is due to bottom-up attentional capture, as new elements that abruptly appear with increases in luminance produce a preview effect whereas new elements that are equiluminant to the background do not. The present study extends this research by examining if new elements that appear from offsets, with and without luminance changes, yield similar findings to onsets. This was indeed the case, as equiluminant offsets did not produce a preview effect but offsets with corresponding increases or decreases in luminance did show the prioritization of new elements over old elements. These findings show that the prioritization of new elements is sensitive to changes in luminance but not to the direction of such changes.     

Contingent visual marking by transients

Preview search is a phenomenon in which a set of new items can be searched with seemingly no interference from items already present in the display. The preview effect has been shown to occur only when the presentation of the new items is accompanied by a luminance change (Donk & Theeuwes, 2001). In a series of experiments, we extend the type of transients that can lead to a preview benefit to offsets and motion, and confirm Donk and Theeuwes's finding that equiluminant color changes do not lead to a preview effect. Like Donk and Theeuwes, we find that preview search does not occur when only the old items undergo a transient change, suggesting that the processes responsible for preview search are triggered when the new items undergo a change detectable by the magnocellular system. In addition, we find that irrelevant transients interfere with preview search only when they match the current attentional set (e.g., luminance change or motion). Results suggest that preview search is not the automatic capture of attention by transients, but rather is contingent on top-down control settings.     

Resisting change: The influence of luminance changes on visual marking and the preview benefit

Visual search can benefit when one set of distractors is presented as a preview, prior to the appearance the second set of distractors plus the target (Watson & Humphreys, 1997). It has been shown that changing the shape of the old, previewed stimuli when the new items appear causes the old stimuli to recompete for selection with the new ones. In contrast, changing the luminance or color of the old stimuli has no detrimental effects. Here, we present five experiments that reassessed the effect of luminance changes in preview search. We show (1) that preview search is remarkably resistant to large changes in the absolute luminance of the old stimuli, even when those changes would ordinarily be sufficient to signal the appearance of a new object and draw attention (Experiments 1 and 2), and (2) that resistance to luminance changes can be bolstered by feature-based inhibitory processes (Experiments 3–5). These findings are discussed in terms of the possible ecological properties of time-based visual selection and possible mechanisms underlying the preview benefit.     

Prioritizing new elements with a brief preview period: Evidence against visual marking

Watson and Humphreys (1997) have proposed that the ability to prioritize new elements over old elements involves a time-consuming process (of at least 400 msec) of active inhibition of the locations of the old elements, which they referred to asvisual marking. Recently, Donk and Theeuwes (2001) have suggested that prioritized selection of new over old elements is an instantaneous process related to the luminance change accompanying the appearance of the new elements. The aim of the present study was to test these two alternatives by investigating whether prioritized selection of new over old elements could be achieved with a very short preview of the old elements (50 msec). The results indicated that participants were able to prioritize selection of new over old elements when the new elements were presented with luminance onset whereas the old elements were not. New elements could not be prioritized if both the old and the new elements appeared with luminance onset. The results indicated that prioritization of new elements is based on an instantaneous process, rather than on a time-consuming process.     

Visual marking beside the mark: Prioritizing selection by abrupt onsets

In a standard visual marking experiment, observers are presented with a display containing one set of elements (old elements) followed after a certain time interval by a second set of elements (new elements). The task of observers is to search for a target among the new elements. Typically, the time to find the target depends only on the number of new elements in the display and not on the number of old elements, showing that observers search only among the new elements. This effect of prioritizing new elements over old elements is explained in terms of top-down inhibition of old objects—that is, visual marking (Watson & Humphreys, 1997). The present study addressed whether this prioritizing is in fact mediated by top-down inhibition of old objects, as suggested by Watson and Humphreys (1997), or whether it is mediated by the abrupt onsets of the newly presented elements (Yantis & Jonides, 1984). In three experiments, the presentations of the old and new elements were or were not accompanied by a luminance change. The results showed that if new elements were equiluminant with the background, no visual marking occurred, suggesting that new elements must have a luminance onset in order to be prioritized over old elements. Implications for current theories on visual selection are discussed.     

The time course of preview search with color-defined, not luminance-defined, stimuli

We examined the time course of preview search, using stimuli that were defined by color, but not by luminance changes. We demonstrate that, under these conditions, search performance in a preview condition improved selectively over time, relative to a baseline condition in which all the items appeared together. The data confirm earlier reports from Humphreys, Kyllinsbaek, et al. (2004) and Watson and Humphreys (1997), who used luminance-defined stimuli and showed a long time course to preview search. The data contradict Donk and Verburg (2004), who argued that the preview benefit was instantaneous but did not include baseline conditions with which to test for any influence of distractors equivalent to the old items in preview search, even under nonpreview conditions. The data support the proposal that the prioritization of new items in preview search is a time-consuming business.     

Visual marking across eye blinks

Visual search for a conjunction target can be made efficient by presenting one initial set of distractors as a preview, prior to the onset of the other items in the search display Watson & Humphreys (Psychological Review 104:90–122, 1997). However, this “preview advantage” is lost if the initial items are offset for a brief period before onsetting again with the search display Kunar, Humphreys, & Smith (Psychological Science 14:181–185, 2003). Researchers have long disputed whether the preview advantage reflects a process of internally coding and suppressing the old items or of the onset of the new items capturing attention Donk & Theeuwes (Perception & Psychophysics 63:891–900, 2001). In this study, we assessed whether an internally driven blink (in which participants close their eyes) acts in the same manner as an external blink produced by offsetting and then onsetting the preview. In the novel blink conditions, participants searched feature, conjunction, and preview displays after being cued to blink their eyes. The search displays were presented during the eye blink, and so were immediately available once participants opened their eyes. Having participants make an eye blink generally slowed search but had no effect on the search slopes. In contrast, imposing an externally driven blink disrupted preview search. The data indicated that visual attention can compensate for internally driven blinks, and this does not lead to the loss of the representations of distractors across time. Moreover, efficient preview search occurred when the search items had no abrupt onsets, demonstrating that onsets of new search items are not critical for the preview benefit.     

Revisiting preview search at isoluminance: new onsets are not necessary for the preview advantage

It has been argued that search performance under preview conditions relies on automatic capture by luminance onsets (Donk & Theeuwes, 2001). We present three experiments in which preview search was examined with both isoluminant and nonisoluminant items (e.g., as defined by luminance onsets). Experiment 1 provided evidence against the automatic capture of attention by onsets. Search benefited when onset previews were followed by new onset stimuli, as compared with a full-set baseline matched for the number of new onsets but in which half the distractors appeared simultaneously at isoluminance. Furthermore, both Experiments 1 and 2 established a preview advantage when isoluminant targets followed onset previews, when compared with appropriate full-set baselines. Experiment 3 replicated this result, while showing that the preview benefit was disrupted by dual-task interference. The data indicate that new onsets are not necessary to generate a preview advantage in search. We discuss the data in terms of search's benefiting from active inhibition of old onset-defined stimuli.     

旧客体抑制和新客体捕获视角下预览效应的机制

预览效应是一种在已经存在的多个旧客体中优先选择多个新客体, 对新客体表现出优先加工的现象。文章综述了预览效应认知神经机制的两种主要观点：(1)旧客体抑制观点, 认为预览效应是由于对旧客体的抑制; (2)新客体突现捕获注意观点, 认为预览效应是由于新客体出现伴随着亮度突然增加捕获注意。这两种观点之间的主要争论在于：预览效应与新旧客体亮度变化的关系; 新旧客体的颜色关系是否影响对目标的搜索; 在一些因素的作用下, 旧客体形状变化是否还会破坏预览效应。文章指出, 预览效应是旧客体抑制机制与新客体突现捕获注意机制共同作用的结果。     

Visual marking and visual change

Five experiments investigated the types of changes that disrupt the preview effect--the benefit gained in difficult search tasks from presenting some distractors earlier in time. A shape change with or without an overall luminance change at the location of an old item was found to disrupt the preview effect, whereas an equivalent luminance change alone or an isoluminant color change was not disruptive. Results suggest that (a) relatively low-level visual changes may not be sufficient to abolish the benefit, (b) the benefit most likely occurs through inhibition applied to locations within a location master map, and (c) inhibition need not be applied to surface features of objects.     

Visual marking beside the mark: prioritizing selection by abrupt onsets

In a standard visual marking experiment, observers are presented with a display containing one set of elements (old elements) followed after a certain time interval by a second set of elements (new elements). The task of observers is to search for a target among the new elements. Typically, the time to find the target depends only on the number of new elements in the display and not on the number of old elements, showing that observers search only among the new elements. This effect of prioritizing new elements over old elements is explained in terms of top-down inhibition of old objects-that is, visual marking (Watson & Humphreys, 1997). The present study addressed whether this prioritizing is in fact mediated by top-down inhibition of old objects, as suggested by Watson and Humphreys (1997), or whether it is mediated by the abrupt onsets of the newly presented elements (Yantis & Jonides, 1984). In three experiments, the presentations of the old and new elements were or were not accompanied by a luminance change. The results showed that if new elements were equiluminant with the background, no visual marking occurred, suggesting that new elements must have a luminance onset in order to be prioritized over old elements. Implications for current theories on visual selection are discussed.     

When something old becomes something new: spatiotemporal object continuity and attentional capture

This article examines the possibility that the visal system treats dynamic cues a instances of new perceptual objects undersome circumstances. Using the contingent capture paradigm (C. L. Folk, R. W. Remington, & J. C. Johnston, 1992), the author compared luminance change cues of different magnitude for their ability to capture attention when participants were set for new objects. Wheras small luminance changes failed to produce attentional capture, large luminance changs indeed captured attention, suggesting that they were treated as compatible with the participants' attentional set for new objects. It is argued that sufficiently large luminance transients led to a disurption of spatiotemporal object continuity and precipitated the emergence of a new perceptual object.     

Spatiotemporal segregation in visual search: evidence from parietal lesions

The mechanisms underlying segmentation and selection of visual stimuli over time were investigated in patients with posterior parietal damage. In a modified visual search task, a preview of old objects preceded search of a new set for a target while the old items remained. In Experiment 1, control participants ignored old and prioritized new items, but patients had severe difficulties finding the target (especially on the contralesional side). In Experiment 2, simplified displays yielded analogous results, ruling out search ease as a crucial factor in poor preview search. In Experiment 3, outlines around distractor groups (to aid segmentation) improved conjunction but not preview search, suggesting a specific deficit in spatiotemporal segmentation. Experiment 4 ruled out spatial disengagement problems as a factor. The data emphasize the role of spatiotemporal segmentation cues in preview search and the parietal lobe in the role of these cues to prioritize search of new stimuli.     

History matters: the preview benefit in search is not onset capture

Visual search for a conjunction target is made easier when distractor items are temporally segregated over time to produce two separate old and new groups (the new group containing the target item). The benefit of presenting half the distractors first is known as the preview effect. Recently, some researchers have argued that the preview effect occurs because new stimuli capture attention. This account was tested in the present study by using a novel "top-up" condition that exploits the fact that when previews appear only briefly before the search display, there is minimal preview benefit. We show that effects of a brief preview can be "topped up" by an earlier exposure of the same items, even when the preview disappears between its first and second presentations.This top-up effect demonstrates that the history of the old stimuli is important for the preview benefit, contrary to the account favoring onset capture. We discuss alternative accounts of how the preview benefit arises.     

New objects do not capture attention without a sensory transient

Attention capture occurs when a stimulus event involuntarily recruits attention. The abrupt appearance of a new object is perhaps the most well-studied attention-capturing event, yet there is debate over the root cause of this capture. Does a new object capture attention because it involves the creation of a new object representation or because its appearance creates a characteristic luminance transient? The present study sought to resolve this question by introducing a new object into a search display, either with or without a unique luminance transient. Contrary to the results of a recent study (Davoli, Suszko, & Abrams, 2007), when the new objects transient was masked by a brief interstimulus interval introduced between the placeholder and search arrays, a new object did not capture attention. Moreover, when a new objects transient was masked, participants could not locate a new object efficiently even when that was their explicit goal. Together, these data suggest that luminance transient signals are necessary for attention capture by new objects.     

Do new objects capture attention?

The visual system relies on several heuristics to direct attention to important locations and objects. One of these mechanisms directs attention to sudden changes in the environment. Although a substantial body of research suggests that this capture of attention occurs only for the abrupt appearance of a new perceptual object, more recent evidence shows that some luminance-based transients (e.g., motion and looming) and some types of brightness change also capture attention. These findings show that new objects are not necessary for attention capture. The present study tested whether they are even sufficient. That is, does a new object attract attention because the visual system is sensitive to new objects or because it is sensitive to the transients that new objects create? In two experiments using a visual search task, new objects did not capture attention unless they created a strong local luminance transient.     

New objects dominate luminance transients in setting attentional priority.

Both the sudden appearance of an object and sudden changes in existing object features influence priority in visual search. However, direct comparisons of these influences have not been made under controlled conditions. In 5 visual search experiments, new object onsets were compared directly with changes in the luminance of old objects. Factors included the luminance contrast of items against the background, the magnitude of luminance change, and the probability that these changes were associated with the target item. New objects were consistently more effective in guiding search, such that a new item with very low luminance contrast was equivalent to an old item undergoing a large change in luminance. An important exception was an old item changing in contrast and polarity, which was as effective as the appearance of a new object. This indicates that search priority is biased toward object rather than situational changes.     

Eye movements and time-based selection: Where do the eyes go in preview search?

In visual search tasks, presenting one set of distractors (previewing them) before a second set which contains the target, improves search efficiency compared to when all items appear simultaneously. It has been proposed that this preview benefit reflects an attentional bias against old information and toward new information. Here we tested directly whether there was such a bias by measuring eye movement behavior. The main findings were that fixations were biased against, and overall dwell times were shorter on, old stimuli during search in the preview condition. In addition, the initial onset of search was delayed in the preview condition and saccades made during the preview period did not disrupt the ability to prioritize new items. The data demonstrate directly that preview search results in an attentional bias toward new items and against old items.     

What is “marked” in visual marking? evidence for effects of configuration in preview search

Visual search for a conjunction target is facilitated when distractor sets are segmented over time: the preview benefit. Watson and Humphreys (1997) suggested that this benefit involved inhibition of old items (visual marking, VM). We investigated whether the preview benefit is sensitive to the configuration of the old distractors. Old distractors changed their location prior to the occurrence of the new items, while also either changing or maintaining their configuration. Configuration changes disrupted search. The results are consistent with object-based VM, which is sensitive to the configuration of old stimuli.     

Top-up search and the attentional blink: A two-stage account of the preview effect in search

An inefficient visual search task can be facilitated if half the distractor items are presented as a preview prior to the presentation of the remaining distractor items and target. This benefit in search is termed the preview effect. Recent research has found that a preview effect can still occur if the previewed items disappear before reappearing again just before the search items (the “top-up” procedure). In this paper we investigate the attentional demands of processing during the preview and the top-up periods. Experiment 1 found that if attention is withdrawn from the top-up stage then no preview effect occurs. Likewise if attention is withdrawn from the initial preview period then the preview effect is reduced (Experiment 2). The data suggest that the preview effect is dependent on attention being paid both to the initial display and also to the re-presentation of the old display before the search display appears. The data counter accounts of preview search in terms of automatic attention capture by new items or by inhibition of return. We discuss alternative accounts of the results, and in particular suggest an amalgamation of a temporal grouping and a visual marking account of preview search.