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.     

You’re looking for what? Comparing search for familiar,nameable objects to search for unfamiliar,novel objects

Searching for items in one’s environment often includes considerable reliance on semantic knowledge. The present study examines the importance of semantic information in visual and memory search, especially with respect to whether the items reside in long-term or working memory. In Experiment 1, participants engaged in hybrid visual memory search for items that were either highly familiar or novel. Importantly, the relatively large number of targets in this hybrid search task necessitated that targets be stored in some form of long-term memory. We found that search for familiar objects was more efficient than search for novel objects. In Experiment 2, we investigated search for familiar versus novel objects when the number of targets was low enough to be stored in working memory. We also manipulated how often participants in Experiment 2 were required to update their target (every trial vs. every block) in order to control for target templates that were stored in long-term memory as a result of repeated exposure over trials. We found no differences in search efficiency for familiar versus novel objects when templates were stored in working memory. Our results suggest that while semantic information may provide additional individuating features that are useful for object recognition in hybrid search, this information could be irrelevant or even distracting when searching for targets stored in working 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.     

工作记忆表征捕获眼动中的颜色优先性

刺激属性所具有的引导效力在工作记忆表征自上而下地引导注意捕获过程中起重要作用, 已有研究表明工作记忆表征的颜色属性在引导注意时具有一定的优势。研究采用工作记忆任务与视觉搜索任务相结合的双任务范式, 结合眼动追踪技术, 通过设置具有较强引导效力的颜色属性与朝向属性进行直接竞争的实验条件, 进一步考察工作记忆表征的颜色属性是否依然具有优先性。实验1发现工作记忆表征的颜色属性与朝向属性同时竞争眼动捕获时, 颜色属性表现出较强的优势, 而朝向属性单独呈现时并未表现出任何捕获效应。实验2与3进一步证实了颜色属性捕获眼动的优先性, 即当颜色属性在面临作为靶子属性的朝向属性的竞争时, 依然能捕获更多的注视点。这些结果直接证实了工作记忆表征的颜色属性在工作记忆表征的捕获眼动的过程中具有较强的引导效力, 相对于其他刺激属性(如朝向、形状)更具有优先性。     

Working memory capacity predicts search accuracy for novel as well as repeated targets

Visual search behaviour is guided by mental representations of targets that direct attention toward relevant features in the environment. Electrophysiological data suggests these target templates are maintained by visual working memory during search for novel targets and rapidly transfer to long term memory with target repetition. If this account is correct, an individual’s working memory capacity should be more predictive of search performance for novel targets than repeated targets. Across six experiments, we tested this hypothesis using both single (Experiments 5 and 6) and multiple (Experiments 1–4) target search tasks with three different types of stimuli (real world objects, letters, and triple conjunction shapes). Each target set was repeated for six consecutive trials. In addition, we estimated visual working memory capacity using a change detection working memory task. Overall, working memory capacity did not predict response time or efficiency in the visual search task. However, working memory capacity was equally predictive of search accuracy for both novel and repeated targets. These results suggest that working memory requirements do not substantially differ between novel and repeated target search, and working memory capacity may continue to play an important role in the encoding or maintenance of target representations after they are presumed to be in long term memory.     

工作记忆表征引导视觉注意选择的眼动研究

工作记忆表征能否引导视觉注意选择？目前实验结果尚不一致。有研究者认为能否观察到注意引导效应取决于视觉搜索类型。研究采用工作记忆任务与视觉搜索任务相结合的双任务范式, 结合眼动追踪技术, 对不同视觉搜索类型下的注意引导效应进行验证。实验1结果发现, 不管视觉搜索任务的靶子是否变化, 在早期的眼动指标上都发现了显著的注意引导效应, 但注意引导效应在靶子固定的视觉搜索任务下表现得更强。实验2在平衡两种视觉搜索任务中的工作记忆负载后发现, 两种视觉搜索任务下都出现了显著的注意引导效应, 但没有发现实验1中所出现的任务间差异。实验结果否定了视觉搜索类型对注意引导效应的决定性影响, 同时也提示工作记忆负载可能在注意引导效应中起重要作用。     

Incidental and intentional visual memory: What memories are and are not affected by encoding tasks?

Prior research into the impact of encoding tasks on visual memory (Castelhano & Henderson, 2005) indicated that incidental and intentional encoding tasks led to similar memory performance. The current study investigated whether different encoding tasks impacted visual memories equally for all types of objects in a conjunction search (e.g., targets, colour distractors, object category distractors, or distractors unrelated to the target). In sequences of pictures, participants searched for prespecified targets (e.g., green apple; Experiment 1), memorized all objects (Experiment 2), searched for specified targets while memorizing all objects (Experiment 3), searched for postidentified targets (Experiment 4), or memorized all objects with one object prespecified (Experiment 5). Encoding task significantly improved visual memory for targets and led to worse memory for unrelated distractors, but did not influence visual memory of distractors that were related to the target's colour or object category. The differential influence of encoding task indicates that the relative importance of the object both positively and negatively influences the memory retained.     

Cross-trial priming in visual search for singleton conjunction targets: role of repeated target and distractor features

Kristjánsson, Wang, and Nakayama (2002) demonstrated that visual search for conjunctively defined targets can be substantially expedited ("primed") when target and distractor features are repeated on consecutive trials. Two experiments were conducted to examine whether the search response time (RT) facilitation on target-present trials results from repetition of target-defining features, distractor features, or both. The experiments used a multiple conjunctive search paradigm (adapted from Kristjánsson et al., 2002), in which the target and distractor features were varied (i.e., repeated) independently of each other across successive trials. The RT facilitation was numerically largest when both target and distractor features were repeated, but not significantly larger than that when only distractor features were repeated. This indicates that cross-trial priming effects in conjunctive visual search result mainly from the repetition of distractor, rather than target, features.     

Memory-based attentional capture by colour and shape contents in visual working memory

Current theories assume that there is substantial overlap between visual working memory (VWM) and visual attention functioning, such that active representations in VWM automatically act as an attentional set, resulting in attentional biases towards objects that match the mnemonic content. Most evidence for this comes from visual search tasks in which a distractor similar to the memory interferes with the detection of a simultaneous target. Here we provide additional evidence using one of the most popular paradigms in the literature for demonstrating an active attentional set: The contingent spatial orienting paradigm of Folk and colleagues. This paradigm allows memory-based attentional biases to be more directly attributed to spatial orienting. Experiment 1 demonstrated a memory-contingent spatial attention effect for colour but not for shape contents of VWM. Experiment 2 tested the hypothesis that the placeholders used for spatial cueing interfered with the shape processing, and showed that memory-based attentional capture for shape returned when placeholders were removed. The results of the present study are consistent with earlier findings from distractor interference paradigms, and provide additional evidence that biases in spatial orienting contribute to memory-based influences on attention.     

Working-memory capacity predicts the executive control of visual search among distractors: The influences of sustained and selective attention

Variation in working-memory capacity (WMC) predicts individual differences in only some attention-control capabilities. Whereas higher WMC subjects outperform lower WMC subjects in tasks requiring the restraint of prepotent but inappropriate responses, and the constraint of attentional focus to target stimuli against distractors, they do not differ in prototypical visual-search tasks, even those that yield steep search slopes and engender top-down control. The present three experiments tested whether WMC, as measured by complex memory span tasks, would predict search latencies when the 1–8 target locations to be searched appeared alone, versus appearing among distractor locations to be ignored, with the latter requiring selective attentional focus. Subjects viewed target-location cues and then fixated on those locations over either long (1,500–1,550 ms) or short (300 ms) delays. Higher WMC subjects identified targets faster than did lower WMC subjects only in the presence of distractors and only over long fixation delays. WMC thus appears to affect subjects' ability to maintain a constrained attentional focus over time.     

Toddlers' language-mediated visual search: They need not have the words for it

Eye movements made by listeners during language-mediated visual search reveal a strong link between visual processing and conceptual processing. For example, upon hearing the word for a missing referent with a characteristic colour (e.g., “strawberry”), listeners tend to fixate a colour-matched distractor (e.g., a red plane) more than a colour-mismatched distractor (e.g., a yellow plane). We ask whether these shifts in visual attention are mediated by the retrieval of lexically stored colour labels. Do children who do not yet possess verbal labels for the colour attribute that spoken and viewed objects have in common exhibit language-mediated eye movements like those made by older children and adults? That is, do toddlers look at a red plane when hearing “strawberry”? We observed that 24-month-olds lacking colour term knowledge nonetheless recognized the perceptual–conceptual commonality between named and seen objects. This indicates that language-mediated visual search need not depend on stored labels for concepts.     

Distractor devaluation requires visual working memory

Visual stimuli seen previously as distractors in a visual search task are subsequently evaluated more negatively than those seen as targets. An attentional inhibition account for this distractor-devaluation effect posits that associative links between attentional inhibition and to-be-ignored stimuli are established during search, stored, and then later reinstantiated, implying that distractor devaluation may require visual working memory (WM) resources. To assess this, we measured distractor devaluation with and without a concurrent visual WM load. Participants viewed a memory array, performed a simple search task, evaluated one of the search items (or a novel item), and then viewed a memory test array. Although distractor devaluation was observed with low (and no) WM load, it was absent when WM load was increased. This result supports the notions that active association of current attentional states with stimuli requires WM and that memory for these associations plays a role in affective response.     

Strategic and automatic effects of visual working memory on attention in visual search

Previous research indicates that visual attention can be automatically captured by sensory inputs that match the contents of visual working memory. However, Woodman and Luck (2007) showed that information in working memory can be used flexibly as a template for either selection or rejection according to task demands. We report two experiments that extend their work. Participants performed a visual search task while maintaining items in visual working memory. Memory items were presented for either a short or long exposure duration immediately prior to the search task. Memory was tested by a change-detection task immediately afterwards. On a random half of trials items in memory matched either one distractor in the search task (Experiment 1) or three (Experiment 2). The main result was that matching distractors speeded or slowed target detection depending on whether memory items were presented for a long or short duration. These effects were more in evidence with three matching distractors than one. We conclude that the influence of visual working memory on visual search is indeed flexible but is not solely a function of task demands. Our results suggest that attentional capture by perceptual inputs matching information in visual working memory involves a fast automatic process that can be overridden by a slower top-down process of attentional avoidance.     

Context and competition in the capture of visual attention

Competition-based models of visual attention propose that perceptual ambiguity is resolved through inhibition, which is stronger when objects share a greater number of neural receptive fields (RFs). According to this theory, the misallocation of attention to a salient distractor--that is, the capture of attention--can be indexed in RF-scaled interference costs. We used this pattern to investigate distractor-related costs in visual search across several manipulations of temporal context. Distractor costs are generally larger under circumstances in which the distractor can be defined by features that have recently characterised the target, suggesting that capture occurs in these trials. However, our results show that search for a target in the presence of a salient distractor also produces RF-scaled costs when the features defining the target and distractor do not vary from trial to trial. Contextual differences in distractor costs appear to reflect something other than capture, perhaps a qualitative difference in the type of attentional mechanism deployed to the distractor.     

Redundancy effects in the perception and memory of visual objects

Is visual representation of an object affected by whether surrounding objects are identical to it, different from it, or absent? To address this question, we tested perceptual priming, visual short-term, and long-term memory for objects presented in isolation or with other objects. Experiment 1 used a priming procedure, where the prime display contained a single face, four identical faces, or four different faces. Subjects identified the gender of a subsequent probe face that either matched or mismatched with one of the prime faces. Priming was stronger when the prime was four identical faces than when it was a single face or four different faces. Experiments 2 and 3 asked subjects to encode four different objects presented on four displays. Holding memory load constant, visual memory was better when each of the four displays contained four duplicates of a single object, than when each display contained a single object. These results suggest that an object's perceptual and memory representations are enhanced when presented with identical objects, revealing redundancy effects in visual processing.     

无关长时记忆表征能否引导视觉注意选择?

与任务相关的长时记忆表征在引导视觉注意选择的过程中扮演着重要的角色,它可以使人们在熟悉的视觉情境中快速搜索目标刺激,并偏离干扰刺激。但当长时记忆表征与任务无关时,还能否引导视觉注意选择?目前还不清楚。实验1采用眼动追踪技术直接比较无关工作记忆表征与无关长时记忆表征在视觉搜索阶段对视觉注意的捕获效应,行为反应时与首次注视点百分率的结果都发现,当无关工作记忆表征在视觉搜索中再次出现时能引导视觉注意偏向到与之匹配的干扰刺激,但无关长时记忆表征并没有表现出类似的注意引导效应;实验2探讨记忆表征由工作记忆系统转移到长时记忆系统的过程中对视觉注意的引导效应,结果发现,随着记忆表征的转移,注意引导效应消失了,实验3排除工作记忆表征的干扰后,依然没有发现无关长时记忆表征对注意的引导效应。以上结果表明,无关长时记忆表征并不能像工作记忆表征一样引导视觉注意选择,工作记忆表征和长时记忆表征对视觉注意的引导属于两个不同的认知过程。     

Does conspicuity enhance distraction? Saliency and eye landing position when searching for objects

While visual saliency may sometimes capture attention, the guidance of eye movements in search is often dominated by knowledge of the target. How is the search for an object influenced by the saliency of an adjacent distractor? Participants searched for a target amongst an array of objects, with distractor saliency having an effect on response time and on the speed at which targets were found. Saliency did not predict the order in which objects in target-absent trials were fixated. The within-target landing position was distributed around a modal position close to the centre of the object. Saliency did not affect this position, the latency of the initial saccade, or the likelihood of the distractor being fixated, suggesting that saliency affects the allocation of covert attention and not just eye movements.     

工作记忆表征的激活与抑制状态对注意引导效应的影响

本研究采用双任务范式, 通过定向遗忘任务操纵工作记忆表征状态, 分别在目标无关和目标相关条件下考察工作记忆激活与抑制状态对视觉搜索早期注意引导效应的影响。实验1与实验2发现当工作记忆表征只可能与视觉搜索分心物匹配时(目标无关条件), 处于激活状态的工作记忆表征会引导视觉注意偏向到与之匹配的分心物, 表现出注意引导效应, 而处于抑制状态的工作记忆表征则没有观察到注意引导效应。实验3与实验4发现, 当工作记忆表征有可能与视觉搜索目标匹配时(目标相关条件), 处于激活状态的工作记忆表征能捕获注意, 而处于抑制状态的工作记忆表征只有与视觉搜索目标匹配时, 才表现出对该搜索目标反应的延迟。这些研究的结果表明(1)处于激活状态的工作记忆表征能有效地引导注意偏向到与之匹配的搜索目标或分心物, 并且这种注意引导效应并未受到抑制动机的影响而被消除或反转; (2)处于抑制状态的工作记忆表征能将抑制状态传递到视觉搜索阶段, 并延迟对与之匹配的搜索目标的反应。     

Task-irrelevant direct gaze facilitates visual search for deviant facial expression

The detection of emotional expression is important particularly when the expression is directed towards the viewer. Therefore, we conjectured that the efficiency in visual search for deviant emotional expression is modulated by gaze direction, which is one of the primary clues for encoding the focus of social attention. To examine this hypothesis, two visual search tasks were conducted. In Emotional Face Search, the participants were required to detect an emotional expression amongst distractor faces with neutral expression; in Neutral Face Search they were required to detect a neutral target among emotional distractors. The results revealed that target detection was accelerated when the target face had direct gaze compared to averted gaze for fearful, angry, and neutral targets, but no effect of distractor gaze direction was observed. An additional experiment including multiple display sizes has shown a shallower search slope in search for a target face with direct gaze than that with averted gaze, indicating that the advantage of a target face with direct gaze is attributable to efficient orientation of attention towards target faces. These results indicate that direct gaze facilitates detection of target face in visual scenery even when gaze discrimination is not the primary task at hand.     

Viewpoint costs occur during consolidation: evidence from the attentional blink

Do the viewpoint costs incurred when naming rotated familiar objects arise during initial identification or during consolidation? To answer this question we employed an attentional blink (AB) task where two target objects appeared amongst a rapid stream of distractor objects. Our assumption was that while both targets and distractors undergo initial identification only targets are consolidated in a form that allows overt report. We presented line drawings of objects with a usual upright canonical orientation, and separately manipulated the orientation of targets and distractors. In two experiments, targets were defined by colour, whereas in a third experiment they were defined by semantic category. Target 1 orientation influenced the AB, with objects rotated by 90 degrees causing a larger second target deficit than upright and upside-down objects. However, distractor orientation did not affect the magnitude of the second target deficit, regardless of whether targets were defined by colour or semantic category. Taken together, these findings suggest that the visual representations involved in the preliminary recognition of familiar objects are viewpoint-invariant and that viewpoint costs are incurred when these objects are consolidated for report.