Incidental memory for parts of scenes from eye movements

Incidental memory for parts of scenes was examined in two search experiments and one memory control experiment. Eye movements were recorded during the search experiments and used to select gaze-contingent sections from search scenes for a surprise memory recognition task. Results from the recognition task showed incidental memory was better for sections viewed longer and with multiple fixations. Sections not fixated during search were still recognized above chance as well. Differences in sections did not affect memory performance in a control experiment when viewing time was held constant. These results show that memory for parts of scenes can occur incidentally during search and encoding of tested sections is better with longer viewing time and with multiple fixations.     

Scene memory is more detailed than you think: the role of categories in visual long-term memory

Observers can store thousands of object images in visual long-term memory with high fidelity, but the fidelity of scene representations in long-term memory is not known. Here, we probed scene-representation fidelity by varying the number of studied exemplars in different scene categories and testing memory using exemplar-level foils. Observers viewed thousands of scenes over 5.5 hr and then completed a series of forced-choice tests. Memory performance was high, even with up to 64 scenes from the same category in memory. Moreover, there was only a 2% decrease in accuracy for each doubling of the number of studied scene exemplars. Surprisingly, this degree of categorical interference was similar to the degree previously demonstrated for object memory. Thus, although scenes have often been defined as a superset of objects, our results suggest that scenes and objects may be entities at a similar level of abstraction in visual long-term memory.     

Incidental visual memory for targets and distractors in visual search

We explored incidental retention of visual details of encountered objects during search. Participants searched for conjunction targets in 32 arrays of 12 pictures of real-world objects and then performed a token discrimination task that examined their memory for visual details of the targets and distractors from the search task. The results indicate that even though participants had not been instructed to memorize the objects, the visual details of search targets and distractor objects related to the targets were retained after the search. Distractor objects unrelated to the search target were remembered more poorly. Eye-movement measures indicated that the objects that were remembered were looked at more frequently during search than those that were not remembered. These results provide support that detailed visual information is included incidentally in the visual representation of an object after the object is no longer in view.     

Incidental learning speeds visual search by lowering response thresholds, not by improving efficiency: evidence from eye movements

When observers search for a target object, they incidentally learn the identities and locations of "background" objects in the same display. This learning can facilitate search performance, eliciting faster reaction times for repeated displays. Despite these findings, visual search has been successfully modeled using architectures that maintain no history of attentional deployments; they are amnesic (e.g., Guided Search Theory). In the current study, we asked two questions: 1) under what conditions does such incidental learning occur? And 2) what does viewing behavior reveal about the efficiency of attentional deployments over time? In two experiments, we tracked eye movements during repeated visual search, and we tested incidental memory for repeated nontarget objects. Across conditions, the consistency of search sets and spatial layouts were manipulated to assess their respective contributions to learning. Using viewing behavior, we contrasted three potential accounts for faster searching with experience. The results indicate that learning does not result in faster object identification or greater search efficiency. Instead, familiar search arrays appear to allow faster resolution of search decisions, whether targets are present or absent.     

Visual search for changes in scenes creates long-term,incidental memory traces

Humans are very good at remembering large numbers of scenes over substantial periods of time. But how good are they at remembering changes to scenes? In this study, we tested scene memory and change detection two weeks after initial scene learning. In Experiments 1–3, scenes were learned incidentally during visual search for change. In Experiment 4, observers explicitly memorized scenes. At test, after two weeks observers were asked to discriminate old from new scenes, to recall a change that they had detected in the study phase, or to detect a newly introduced change in the memorization experiment. Next, they performed a change detection task, usually looking for the same change as in the study period. Scene recognition memory was found to be similar in all experiments, regardless of the study task. In Experiment 1, more difficult change detection produced better scene memory. Experiments 2 and 3 supported a “depth-of-processing” account for the effects of initial search and change detection on incidental memory for scenes. Of most interest, change detection was faster during the test phase than during the study phase, even when the observer had no explicit memory of having found that change previously. This result was replicated in two of our three change detection experiments. We conclude that scenes can be encoded incidentally as well as explicitly and that changes in those scenes can leave measurable traces even if they are not explicitly recalled.     

Constructing visual representations of natural scenes: the roles of short- and long-term visual memory

A "follow-the-dot" method was used to investigate the visual memory systems supporting accumulation of object information in natural scenes. Participants fixated a series of objects in each scene, following a dot cue from object to object. Memory for the visual form of a target object was then tested. Object memory was consistently superior for the two most recently fixated objects, a recency advantage indicating a visual short-term memory component to scene representation. In addition, objects examined earlier were remembered at rates well above chance, with no evidence of further forgetting when 10 objects intervened between target examination and test and only modest forgetting with 402 intervening objects. This robust prerecency performance indicates a visual long-term memory component to scene representation.     

Interrupted visual searches reveal volatile search memory

This study investigated memory from interrupted visual searches. Participants conducted a change detection search task on polygons overlaid on scenes. Search was interrupted by various disruptions, including unfilled delay, passive viewing of other scenes, and additional search on new displays. Results showed that performance was unaffected by short intervals of unfilled delay or passive viewing, but it was impaired by additional search tasks. Across delays, memory for the spatial layout of the polygons was retained for future use, but memory for polygon shapes, background scene, and absolute polygon locations was not. The authors suggest that spatial memory aids interrupted visual searches, but the use of this memory is easily disrupted by additional searches.     

Sustained conscious access to incidental memories in RSVP

In visual search of natural scenes, differentiation of briefly fixated but task-irrelevant distractor items from incidental memory is often comparable to explicit memorization. However, many characteristics of incidental memory remain unclear, including the capacity for its conscious retrieval. Here, we examined incidental memory for faces in either upright or inverted orientation using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation (RSVP). Subjects were instructed to detect a target face in a sequence of 8–15 faces cropped from natural scene photographs (Experiment 1). If the target face was identified within a brief time window, the subject proceeded to an incidental memory task. Here, subjects used incidental memory to discriminate between a probe face (a distractor in the RSVP stream) and a novel, foil face. In Experiment 2 we reduced scene-related semantic coherency by intermixing faces from multiple scenes and contrasted incidental memory with explicit memory, a condition where subjects actively memorized each face from the sequence without searching for a target. In both experiments, we measured objective performance (Type 1 AUC) and metacognitive accuracy (Type 2 AUC), revealing sustained and consciously accessible incidental memory for upright and inverted faces. In novel analyses of face categories, we examined whether accuracy or metacognitive judgments are affected by shared semantic features (i.e., similarity in gender, race, age). Similarity enhanced the accuracy of incidental memory discriminations but did not influence metacognition. We conclude that incidental memory is sustained and consciously accessible, is not reliant on scene contexts, and is not enhanced by explicit memorization.     

Object-position binding in visual memory for natural scenes and object arrays

Nine experiments examined the means by which visual memory for individual objects is structured into a larger representation of a scene. Participants viewed images of natural scenes or object arrays in a change detection task requiring memory for the visual form of a single target object. In the test image, 2 properties of the stimulus were independently manipulated: the position of the target object and the spatial properties of the larger scene or array context. Memory performance was higher when the target object position remained the same from study to test. This same-position advantage was reduced or eliminated following contextual changes that disrupted the relative spatial relationships among contextual objects (context deletion, scrambling, and binding change) but was preserved following contextual change that did not disrupt relative spatial relationships (translation). Thus, episodic scene representations are formed through the binding of objects to scene locations, and object position is defined relative to a larger spatial representation coding the relative locations of contextual objects.     

The target effect: Visual memory for unnamed search targets

Search targets are typically remembered much better than other objects even when they are viewed for less time. However, targets have two advantages that other objects in search displays do not have: They are identified categorically before the search, and finding them represents the goal of the search task. The current research investigated the contributions of both of these types of information to the long-term visual memory representations of search targets. Participants completed either a predefined search or a unique-object search in which targets were not defined with specific categorical labels before searching. Subsequent memory results indicated that search target memory was better than distractor memory even following ambiguously defined searches and when the distractors were viewed significantly longer. Superior target memory appears to result from a qualitatively different representation from those of distractor objects, indicating that decision processes influence visual memory.     

To see and remember: visually specific information is retained in memory from previously attended objects in natural scenes

What is the nature of the representation formed during the viewing of natural scenes? We tested two competing hypotheses regarding the accumulation of visual information during scene viewing. The first holds that coherent visual representations disintegrate as soon as attention is withdrawn from an object and thus that the visual representation of a scene is exceedingly impoverished. The second holds that visual representations do not necessarily decay upon the withdrawal of attention, but instead can be accumulated in memory from previously attended regions. Target objects in line drawings of natural scenes were changed during a saccadic eye movement away from those objects. Three findings support the second hypothesis. First, changes to the visual form of target objects (token substitution) were successfully detected, as indicated by both explicit and implicit measures, even though the target object was not attended when the change occurred. Second, these detections were often delayed until well after the change. Third, changes to semantically inconsistent target objects were detected better than changes to semantically consistent objects.     

Recall by expert medical practitioners and novices as a record of processing attention

Using recall of clinical protocols as a measure of expertise in medicine has yielded disappointingly small effects. Experiments using recall of clinical laboratory data are presented to provide an explanation. In one experiment, subjects either deliberately memorized or first diagnosed and then were incidentally asked for memory. With incidental instructions, experts recalled over twice as much data as did students, but with memorization instructions, student performance approximated that of experts. Experts also showed a large advantage over students in incidental recall of data that were not relevant to the problem solution. These results suggest that expert processing in this "discrete, independent inputs" domain requires effortful analysis with minimal reliance on default values, rather than relatively effortless pattern perception reported in highly visual areas of expertise. For this area, intentional memory is a misleading measure of expertise. However, incidental memory is a valuable measure of processing during diagnosis.     

Learning in repeated visual search

Visual search (e.g., finding a specific object in an array of other objects) is performed most effectively when people are able to ignore distracting nontargets. In repeated search, however, incidental learning of object identities may facilitate performance. In three experiments, with over 1,100 participants, we examined the extent to which search could be facilitated by object memory and by memory for spatial layouts. Participants searched for new targets (real-world, nameable objects) embedded among repeated distractors. To make the task more challenging, some participants performed search for multiple targets, increasing demands on visual working memory (WM). Following search, memory for search distractors was assessed using a surprise two-alternative forced choice recognition memory test with semantically matched foils. Search performance was facilitated by distractor object learning and by spatial memory; it was most robust when object identity was consistently tied to spatial locations and weakest (or absent) when object identities were inconsistent across trials. Incidental memory for distractors was better among participants who searched under high WM load, relative to low WM load. These results were observed when visual search included exhaustive-search trials (Experiment 1) or when all trials were self-terminating (Experiment 2). In Experiment 3, stimulus exposure was equated across WM load groups by presenting objects in a single-object stream; recognition accuracy was similar to that in Experiments 1 and 2. Together, the results suggest that people incidentally generate memory for nontarget objects encountered during search and that such memory can facilitate search performance.     

客体及其位置记忆的眼动研究(中文)

In this paper we briefly describe preliminary data from two experiments that we have carried out to investigate the relationship between visual encoding and memory for objects and their locations within scenes. In these experiments, we recorded participants′ eye movements as they viewed a photograph of a cubicle with 12 objects positioned pseudo-randomly on a desk and shelves. After viewing the photograph, participants were taken to the actual cubicle where they undertook two memory tests. Participants were asked to identify the 12 target objects(from the photograph)presented amongst 12 distractors. They were then required to place each of the objects in the location that they occupied in the photograph. These tests assessed participants′ memory for identity of the objects and their locations. In Experiment 1, we assessed the influence of the encoding period and the test delay on object identity and location memory. In Experiment 2 we manipulated scanning behaviour during encoding by "boxing"some of the objects in the photo. We showed that using boxes to change eye movement behaviour during encoding directly affected the nature of memory for the scene. The results of these studies indicate a fundamental relationship between visual encoding and memory for objects and their locations. We explain our findings in terms of the Visual Memory Model(Hollingworth & Henderson, 2002).     

Object–scene inconsistencies do not capture gaze: evidence from the flash-preview moving-window paradigm

In the present study, we investigated the influence of object-scene relationships on eye movement control during scene viewing. We specifically tested whether an object that is inconsistent with its scene context is able to capture gaze from the visual periphery. In four experiments, we presented rendered images of naturalistic scenes and compared baseline consistent objects with semantically, syntactically, or both semantically and syntactically inconsistent objects within those scenes. To disentangle the effects of extrafoveal and foveal object-scene processing on eye movement control, we used the flash-preview moving-window paradigm: A short scene preview was followed by an object search or free viewing of the scene, during which visual input was available only via a small gaze-contingent window. This method maximized extrafoveal processing during the preview but limited scene analysis to near-foveal regions during later stages of scene viewing. Across all experiments, there was no indication of an attraction of gaze toward object-scene inconsistencies. Rather than capturing gaze, the semantic inconsistency of an object weakened contextual guidance, resulting in impeded search performance and inefficient eye movement control. We conclude that inconsistent objects do not capture gaze from an initial glimpse of a scene.     

Scene and position specificity in visual memory for objects

This study investigated whether and how visual representations of individual objects are bound in memory to scene context. Participants viewed a series of naturalistic scenes, and memory for the visual form of a target object in each scene was examined in a 2-alternative forced-choice test, with the distractor object either a different object token or the target object rotated in depth. In Experiments 1 and 2, object memory performance was more accurate when the test object alternatives were displayed within the original scene than when they were displayed in isolation, demonstrating object-to-scene binding. Experiment 3 tested the hypothesis that episodic scene representations are formed through the binding of object representations to scene locations. Consistent with this hypothesis, memory performance was more accurate when the test alternatives were displayed within the scene at the same position originally occupied by the target than when they were displayed at a different position.     

Fixation durations in scene viewing: Modeling the effects of local image features,oculomotor parameters,and task

Scene perception requires the orchestration of image- and task-related processes with oculomotor constraints. The present study was designed to investigate how these factors influence how long the eyes remain fixated on a given location. Linear mixed models (LMMs) were used to test whether local image statistics (including luminance, luminance contrast, edge density, visual clutter, and the number of homogeneous segments), calculated for 1° circular regions around fixation locations, modulate fixation durations, and how these effects depend on task-related control. Fixation durations and locations were recorded from 72 participants, each viewing 135 scenes under three different viewing instructions (memorization, preference judgment, and search). Along with the image-related predictors, the LMMs simultaneously considered a number of oculomotor and spatiotemporal covariates, including the amplitudes of the previous and next saccades, and viewing time. As a key finding, the local image features around the current fixation predicted this fixation’s duration. For instance, greater luminance was associated with shorter fixation durations. Such immediacy effects were found for all three viewing tasks. Moreover, in the memorization and preference tasks, some evidence for successor effects emerged, such that some image characteristics of the upcoming location influenced how long the eyes stayed at the current location. In contrast, in the search task, scene processing was not distributed across fixation durations within the visual span. The LMM-based framework of analysis, applied to the control of fixation durations in scenes, suggests important constraints for models of scene perception and search, and for visual attention in general.     

Not all visual memories are created equal

Two experiments examined how well the long-term visual memories of objects that are encountered multiple times during visual search are updated. Participants searched for a target two or four times (e.g., white cat) among distractors that shared the target's colour, category, or were unrelated while their eye movements were recorded. Following the search, a surprise visual memory test was given. With additional object presentations, only target memory reliably improved; distractor memory was unaffected by the number of object presentations. Regression analyses using the eye movement variables as predictors indicated that number of object presentations predicted target memory with no additional impact of other viewing measures. In contrast, distractor memory was best predicted by the viewing pattern on the distractor objects. Finally, Experiment 2 showed that target memory was influenced by number of target object presentations, not number of searches for the target. Each of these experiments demonstrates visual memory differences between target and distractor objects and may provide insight into representational differences in visual memory.     

Effects of rodent prefrontal lesions on object-based, visual scene memory

It has been suggested that certain prefrontal areas contribute to a neural circuit that mediates visual object memory. Using a successive go/no-go visual scene discrimination task, object-based long-term memory was assessed in two rodent prefrontal regions. Rewarded trials consisted of a standard scene of four toy objects placed over baited food wells. The objects and their locations composing the standard scene remained constant for the duration of the study. Trials in which one of the standard scene objects was replaced with a novel object were not rewarded. Following the establishment of a significant difference between latency to approach the rewarded standard scene compared to latency to approach non-rewarded scenes, quinolinic acid or control vehicle was infused into either the prelimbic and infralimbic cortices or the anterior cingulate cortex. Following a 1 week recovery period, subjects were retested. Animals with prelimbic/infralimbic cortex lesions displayed a profound and sustained deficit, whereas, animals with anterior cingulate cortex lesions showed a slight initial impairment but eventually recovered. Both lesion groups acquired a simple single object discrimination task as quickly as controls indicating that the deficits on the original scene discrimination task were not due to motivational, response inhibition, or perceptual problems.     

Semantic memory for contextual regularities within and across scene categories: Evidence from eye movements

When encountering familiar scenes, observers can use item-specific memory to facilitate the guidance of attention to objects appearing in known locations or configurations. Here, we investigated how memory for relational contingencies that emerge across different scenes can be exploited to guide attention. Participants searched for letter targets embedded in pictures of bedrooms. In a between-subjects manipulation, targets were either always on a bed pillow or randomly positioned. When targets were systematically located within scenes, search for targets became more efficient. Importantly, this learning transferred to bedrooms without pillows, ruling out learning that is based on perceptual contingencies. Learning also transferred to living room scenes, but it did not transfer to kitchen scenes, even though both scene types contained pillows. These results suggest that statistical regularities abstracted across a range of stimuli are governed by semantic expectations regarding the presence of target-predicting local landmarks. Moreover, explicit awareness of these contingencies led to a central tendency bias in recall memory for precise target positions that is similar to the spatial category effects observed in landmark memory. These results broaden the scope of conditions under which contextual cuing operates and demonstrate how semantic memory plays a causal and independent role in the learning of associations between objects in real-world scenes.