Spatial interference between attended items engenders serial visual processing

A pair of experiments investigated the architecture of visual processing, parallel versus serial, across high and low levels of spatial interference in a divided attention task. Subjects made speeded judgments that required them to attend to a pair of color-cued objects among gray filler items, with the spatial proximity between the attended items varied to manipulate the strength of interference between attended items. Systems factorial analysis (Townsend & Nozawa, Journal of Mathematical Psychology 39:321-359, 1995) was used to identify processing architecture. Experiment 1, using moderately dense displays, found evidence of parallel processing whether attended objects were in low or high proximity to one another. Experiment 2, using higher-density displays, found evidence of parallel selection when attended stimuli were widely separated but serial processing when they were in high proximity. Divided visual attention can operate in parallel under conditions of low or moderate spatial interference between selected items, but strong interference engenders serial processing.     

Attention meets binding: Only attended distractors are used for the retrieval of event files

Response-irrelevant stimuli can be encoded with, and later on retrieve, a response given to a relevant stimulus, an effect that is called distractor–response binding. In three experiments using a prime–probe design, we investigated whether the allocation of attention modulates the processes contributing to distractor–response binding. Participants identified letters via keypresses while attending to one of two sets of simultaneously presented but response-irrelevant number stimuli. In different experiments, both spatial attention and feature-based attention were allocated to the response-irrelevant stimuli. The results showed that only attended response-irrelevant stimuli elicited effects of distractor–response binding. In particular, while the encoding of response-irrelevant stimuli and responses was not particularly affected by attention during prime processing, only attended response-irrelevant stimuli in the probe retrieved previous responses. Hence, we show that attention affects action regulation due to modulating the influence of stimulus–response binding on behavior.     

Space, object, and task selection

Within the field of selective attention, two separate literatures have developed, one examining the effect of selection of objects and another examining the effect of selection of features. The present study bridged these two traditions by examining the compatibility effects generated by two features of attended and unattended nontarget (foil) stimuli. On each trial, participants determined either the identity or the orientation of a visual stimulus. Spatial attention was controlled using cues (presented prior to the target frame) designed to involuntarily capture attention. We independently manipulated the stimulus dimension the participants prepared for and the stimulus dimension on which they actually executed the task. Preparation had little influence on the magnitude of compatibility effects from foil stimuli. For attended stimuli, the stimulus dimension used in executing the task produced large compatibility effects, regardless of whether that dimension was prepared. These and other compatibility effects (e.g., Stroop effects) are discussed in relation to an integrative model of attentional selection. The key assumptions are that (1) selection occurs at three distinct levels (space, object, and task), (2) spatial attention leads to semantic processing of all dimensions, and (3) features do not automatically activate responses unless that object is selected for action.     

Selective attention and the perception of an attended nontarget object

Although many theories of attention assume that attending to an object results in the processing of all its feature dimensions, there has been no direct evidence that the irrelevant dimensions of an attended nontarget object are encoded. This article explores factors that modulate such processing. In 6 experiments, participants made a speeded response to a probe preceded by a prime that varied in 2 dimensions. Their reaction times to the probe were influenced by the response compatibility between the relevant and irrelevant dimensions of the prime. Furthermore, the effect was observed only when attention was directed to a nonlocation object feature and when participants' reaction times were relatively long. These results suggest that the effect of attention on a nontarget object is more complex than was previously understood.     

Spatial attention can be biased towards an expected dimension

A commonly held view in both exogenous and endogenous orienting is that spatial attention is associated with enhanced processing of all stimuli at the attended location. However, we often search for a specific target at a particular location, so an observer should be able to jointly specify the target identity and expected location. Whether attention can bias dimension-specific processes at a particular location is not yet clear. We used a dual task to examine the effects of endogenous spatial cues on the accuracy of perceptual judgments of different dimensions. Participants responded to a motion target and a colour target, presented at the same or different locations. We manipulated a central cue to predict the location of the motion or colour target. While overall performance in the two tasks was comparable, cueing effects were larger for the target whose location was predicted by the cue, implying that when attending a particular location, processing of the likely dimension was preferentially enhanced. Additionally, an asymmetry between the motion and colour tasks was seen; motion was modulated by attention, and colour was not. We conclude that attention has some ability to select a dimension at a particular location, indicating integration of spatial and feature-based attention.     

Feature-based control of attention: evidence for two forms of dimension weighting.

In three experiments, I examined whether prior knowledge of a target feature dimension is useful for guiding spatial attention to the target in a variety of tasks: visual search (Experiments 1A and 1B), texture segregation (Experiment 2), and visual enumeration (Experiment 3). Experiment 1A used a simple search task and found that reaction times for blocks in which a target was defined within a single feature dimension were shorter than those for blocks in which a target was defined across dimensions (within-dimension facilitation: WDF). Intertrial facilitation (ITF; Müller, Heller, & Ziegler, 1995), a dimension-based priming effect from one trial to the immediately following one, was also observed. Both WDF and ITF disappeared when the same stimuli were used under a compound search task (Experiment 1B), in which participants responded to an attribute of the target in a feature dimension different from its defining dimensions. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that WDF and ITF are not necessarily contingent upon each other: In a texture discrimination task, only WDF was found; in an enumeration task for six or seven targets, only ITF was found. These results show that the two forms of dimension weighting, WDF and ITF, are mediated by different mechanisms. WDF was eliminated when focal attention to targets was required, suggesting that feature-based modulation is limited as a source for controlling spatial attention (Kumada, 1999). ITF was correlated with type of response, suggesting dimension-specific response mechanisms (Cohen & Shoup, 1997).     

Feature-based control of attention: Evidence for two forms of dimension weighting

In three experiments, I examined whether prior knowledge of a target feature dimension is useful for guiding spatial attention to the target in a variety of tasks: visual search (Experiments 1A and 1B), texture segregation (Experiment 2), and visual enumeration (Experiment 3). Experiment 1A used a simple search task and found that reaction times for blocks in which a target was defined within a single feature dimension were shorter than those for blocks in which a target was defined across dimensions (within-dimension facilitation; WDF). Intertrial facilitation (ITF; Müller, Heller, & Ziegler, 1995), a dimension-based priming effect from one trial to the immediately following one, was also observed. Both WDF and ITF disappeared when the same stimuli were used under a compound search task (Experiment 1B), in which participants responded to an attribute of the target in a feature dimension different from its defining dimensions. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that WDF and ITF are not necessarily contingent upon each other: In a texture discrimination task, only WDF was found; in an enumeration task for six or seven targets, only ITF was found. These results show that the two forms of dimension weighting, WDF and ITF, are mediated by different mechanisms. WDF was eliminated when focal attention to targets was required, suggesting that feature-based modulation is limited as a source for controlling spatial attention (Kumada, 1999). ITF was correlated with type of response, suggesting dimension-specific response mechanisms (Cohen & Shoup, 1997).     

Localized attentional interference affects object individuation, not feature detection

Modern theorists conceptualize visual selective attention as a competition between object representations for the control of extrastriate receptive fields, an account supported by the finding that attentional selection of one stimulus can degrade processing of nearby stimuli. In the present study the conditions that produce reciprocal interference between attended stimuli are examined. Each display contained either no, one, or two feature-defined target items among an array of homogeneous distractors. Observers performed two tasks, feature detection and object individuation. The feature-detection task required observers to determine if any targets were present within the display. The object-individuation task required observers to determine if the number of targets was exactly two. Spatially mediated interference between target pairs occurred in the object-individuation task, but had no effect on feature detection. Results suggest that localized interference between attended stimuli occurs only when observers are required to resolve the features of individual objects, consistent with the competitive interaction models of attention.     

Garner interference is not solely driven by stimulus uncertainty

The speeded classification tasks popularized by Garner (1974), with their accompanying labels of separable and integral dimensions, have become the dominant paradigm for characterizing perceptual interactions between stimulus dimensions. Separable dimensions like color and shape can be selectively attended to at will, but integral dimensions like hue and brightness cannot. When classifying stimuli with respect to a single dimension, integral stimuli lead to faster performance in the baseline block, where only that single dimension varies, than in the filtering block, in which a second dimension is allowed to vary irrelevantly. No such difference is predicted for separable dimensions lead to no difference. The comparison between baseline and filtering confounds a change in the number of stimuli with a change in the number of variant dimensions. A new experimental condition is proposed utilizing three stimulus dimensions to hold the number of stimuli constant while introducing variance along a second irrelevant dimension. Data indicate that interference increases, suggesting that changes in the number of potential stimuli within a block are not necessary for Garner interference, in contrast to the accounts provided by extant quantitative models.     

Voluntary attention increases perceived spatial frequency

Voluntary covert attention selects relevant sensory information for prioritized processing. The behavioral and neural consequences of such selection have been extensively documented, but its phenomenology has received little empirical investigation. Involuntary attention increases perceived spatial frequency (Gobell & Carrasco, 2005), but involuntary attention can differ from voluntary attention in its effects on performance in tasks mediated by spatial resolution (Yeshurun, Montagna, & Carrasco, 2008). Therefore, we ask whether voluntary attention affects the subjective appearance of spatial frequency—a fundamental dimension of visual perception underlying spatial resolution. We used a demanding rapid serial visual presentation task to direct voluntary attention and measured perceived spatial frequency at the attended and unattended locations. Attention increased the perceived spatial frequency of suprathreshold stimuli and also improved performance on a concurrent orientation discrimination task. In the control experiment, we ruled out response bias as an alternative account by using a lengthened interstimulus interval, which allows observers to disengage attention from the cued location. In contrast to the main experiment, the observers showed neither increased perceived spatial frequency nor improved orientation discrimination at the attended location. Thus, this study establishes that voluntary attention increases perceived spatial frequency. This phenomenological consequence links behavioral and neurophysiological studies on the effects of attention.     

Influence of auditory and audiovisual stimuli on the right–left prevalence effect

When auditory stimuli are used in two-dimensional spatial compatibility tasks, where the stimulus and response configurations vary along the horizontal and vertical dimensions simultaneously, a right–left prevalence effect occurs in which horizontal compatibility dominates over vertical compatibility. The right–left prevalence effects obtained with auditory stimuli are typically larger than that obtained with visual stimuli even though less attention should be demanded from the horizontal dimension in auditory processing. In the present study, we examined whether auditory or visual dominance occurs when the two-dimensional stimuli are audiovisual, as well as whether there will be cross-modal facilitation of response selection for the horizontal and vertical dimensions. We also examined whether there is an additional benefit of adding a pitch dimension to the auditory stimulus to facilitate vertical coding through use of the spatial-musical association of response codes (SMARC) effect, where pitch is coded in terms of height in space. In Experiment 1, we found a larger right–left prevalence effect for unimodal auditory than visual stimuli. Neutral, non-pitch coded, audiovisual stimuli did not result in cross-modal facilitation, but did show evidence of visual dominance. The right–left prevalence effect was eliminated in the presence of SMARC audiovisual stimuli, but the effect influenced horizontal rather than vertical coding. Experiment 2 showed that the influence of the pitch dimension was not in terms of influencing response selection on a trial-to-trial basis, but in terms of altering the salience of the task environment. Taken together, these findings indicate that in the absence of salient vertical cues, auditory and audiovisual stimuli tend to be coded along the horizontal dimension and vision tends to dominate audition in this two-dimensional spatial stimulus–response task.     

Asymmetric integrality with dimensions of visual pattern

Subjects performed speeded classification tasks with visual patterns that varied in two dimensions: the elements used to construct the patterns (the letters X, Y, V, and 0) and the configurations formed by the spatial arrangement of the elements. Neither dimension could be attended to selectively without interference from the other, indicating that the dimensions are integral. But the amount of interference between the two dimensions was asymmetrical; irrelevant variation of elements (while classifying by configuration) was harder to ignore than irrelevant variation of configuration (while classifying by elements). This held true whether the element or the configuration discrimination was easier in tasks with no irrelevant variation. It is concluded that the asymmetry is due to attentional strategies in the processing of these patterns and not to the discriminabilities of the dimensions used.

     

May I have your attention please: Binding of attended but response-irrelevant features

The feature codes of stimuli and responses can be integrated, and if a stimulus is repeated it can retrieve the previously integrated response. Furthermore, even irrelevant features can be integrated and, upon repetition, retrieve the response. Yet the role of attention in feature integration and retrieval is not clearly understood. Some theories assume a central role of attention (e.g., Logan, 1988; Treisman & Gelade, 1980), but other studies have shown no influence of attention on feature binding (e.g., Hommel, 2005). In the present experiments the effect of attention on the integration of two different response-irrelevant features of the same stimulus was examined. In two experiments, participants responded to the color (response feature) of word stimuli, while two irrelevant features of the words (word type and valence) were systematically varied. Participants’ attention was directed to either one or the other of the response-irrelevant features by asking participants to report that feature at the end of the trial. Feature–response binding effects in the color task were observed to be stronger for the attended response-irrelevant feature. These results indicate that feature binding is not only very flexible but also sensitive to the distribution of attention. It is also automatic, in the sense that as long as attention is available, feature binding occurs irrespective of the task-specific demands.     

Crossmodal attention switching: Auditory dominance in temporal discrimination tasks

Visual stimuli are often processed more efficiently than accompanying stimuli in another modality. In line with this “visual dominance”, earlier studies on attentional switching showed a clear benefit for visual stimuli in a bimodal visual–auditory modality-switch paradigm that required spatial stimulus localization in the relevant modality. The present study aimed to examine the generality of this visual dominance effect. The modality appropriateness hypothesis proposes that stimuli in different modalities are differentially effectively processed depending on the task dimension, so that processing of visual stimuli is favored in the dimension of space, whereas processing auditory stimuli is favored in the dimension of time. In the present study, we examined this proposition by using a temporal duration judgment in a bimodal visual–auditory switching paradigm. Two experiments demonstrated that crossmodal interference (i.e., temporal stimulus congruence) was larger for visual stimuli than for auditory stimuli, suggesting auditory dominance when performing temporal judgment tasks. However, attention switch costs were larger for the auditory modality than for visual modality, indicating a dissociation of the mechanisms underlying crossmodal competition in stimulus processing and modality-specific biasing of attentional set.     

When does visual attention select all features of a distractor?

What happens after visual attention is allocated to an object? Although many theories of attention assume that all of its features are selected and processed, there has been little direct evidence that an irrelevant feature dimension of an attended nontarget is processed. In 5 experiments presented here, the authors used a singleton paradigm to investigate the effect of attention on nontarget objects. Participants made a speeded feature discrimination of a target for which the response was either compatible or incompatible with an irrelevant feature dimension of a distractor. The results show that the irrelevant distractor features were processed to the point that they interfered with the response to the target. The response compatibility effect was observed even when the location of the target or the distractor was invariant, although it was much weaker when both locations were invariant. These results demonstrate that in many circumstances, an attended distractor is completely selected and fully processed, and the complete processing of distractors depends on a number of factors, many of which are related to the strength of attention to the distractor.     

Integral processing of visual place and auditory voicing information during phonetic perception.

Results of auditory speech experiments show that reaction times (RTs) for place classification in a test condition in which stimuli vary along the dimensions of both place and voicing are longer than RTs in a control condition in which stimuli vary only in place. Similar results are obtained when subjects are asked to classify the stimuli along the voicing dimension. By taking advantage of the "McGurk" effect (McGurk & MacDonald, 1976), the present study investigated whether a similar pattern of interference extends to situations in which variation along the place dimension occurs in the visual modality. The results showed that RTs for classifying phonetic features in the test condition were significantly longer than in the control condition for the place and voicing dimensions. These results indicate a mutual and symmetric interference exists in the classification of the two dimensions, even when the variation along the dimensions occurs in separate modalities.     

Developmental changes in attentional skills: the effect of irrelevant variations on encoding and response selection

The present experiments examine how irrelevant variations within a stimulus set interfere with performance in a selective attention task. Second graders, fifth graders, and adults were administered a discrete trial version of a selective attention task in which they were required to search for an object that matched the prime on the targeted dimension. The stimuli in the first experiment were constructed from spatially integrated dimensions whereas the second experiment used spatially separated dimensions. The results indicated that while the spatially separated dimensions were perceived independently by all age groups, developmental differences in perceived structure were evident with the spatially integrated dimensions. Problems associated with response selection were a major source of interference with both types of stimuli, but the severity of the interference varied with the age of the perceiver and the nature of the stimuli. The developmental implications of these findings were considered.     

Processes underlying dimensional interactions: Correspondences between linguistic and nonlinguistic dimensions

In six experiments, we examined speeded classification when one dimension was linguistic and the other was nonlinguistic. In five of these, attributes on the dimensions corresponded meaningfully, having in common the concepts "high" and "low." For example, in Experiment 1, the visually presented words HI and LO were paired with high- or low-pitched tones; in Experiment 2, the dimensions were visual words and vertical position, in Experiment 3, they were spoken words and position, and in Experiments 4 and 5, spoken words and pitch. For each dimension in each pair, subjects suffered Garner interference when dimensions were varied orthogonally. Garner interference remained constant across 15 blocks of trials (Experiment 5). Subjects also showed significant congruity effects in all experiments, with attributes from congruent stimuli (e.g., HI/high pitch) classified faster than attributes from incongruent stimuli (e.g., HI/low pitch). These results differ from those obtained previously with noncorresponding pairs of linguistic-nonlinguistic dimensions. The results also differ from those obtained with traditional Stroop dimensions (colors and color words; Experiment 6), which showed minimal Garner interference and diminishing congruity effects across blocks of trials. We conclude that the interactions found here represent cross-talk between channels within a semantic level of processing. We contrast our view with current models of dimensional interaction.     

Attention,instruction, and response representation

A two-dimensional Simon-type task was devised to investigate the impact of task requirements and explicit instructions on spatial action coding. Subjects performed actions that were defined on two spatial dimensions: horizontal (left-right) or vertical (top-bottom). The relevant stimulus feature was nonspatial but the stimuli varied on the horizontal and the vertical dimension, so that horizontal and vertical S-R compatibility effects could be measured separately. Implicit task requirements were manipulated by having the subjects perform an unrelated task before the Simon task—a task in which only one of the two spatial dimensions was relevant. Instructions were varied by describing the responses in the unrelated priming task and/or in the Simon task in spatial terms or by referring to nonspatial features of the response keys. Priming a particular dimension increased the Simon effect on that dimension, whereas instructions had no differential effect. These findings suggest that, first, drawing attention to a particular dimension leads to a stronger contribution to event representation of those features defined on that dimension (intentional weighting) and, second, that instructions do not affect action coding if the manipulation does not change the task goal.     

Location vs. frequency of pure tones as a basis of fast discrimination

There are ample data suggesting that a spatial difference between two competing auditory messages provides a better basis for selective attention and listening than other differences. The present experiments show that the spatial difference (left vs. right ear) between two auditory inputs leads to their faster discrimination than even large differences in frequency (in the same ear). These results might explain the afore-mentioned privileged status of the spatial dimension as a basis of selective attention: spatial differences lead in faster identification of relevant or attended input than differences in other dimensions.