Literature DB >> 15006031

Visual search and dual tasks reveal two distinct attentional resources.

Rufin VanRullen1, Lavanya Reddy, Christof Koch.   

Abstract

Most theories of visual processing assume that a target will "pop out" from an array of distractors ("parallel" visual search, e.g., color or orientation discrimination) if targets and distractors can be discriminated without attention. When the discrimination requires attention (e.g., rotated L vs. T or red-green vs. green-red bisected disks), "serial" examination is needed in visual search. Attentional requirements are also frequently assessed by measuring interference from a concurrently performed attentionally demanding task. It is commonly believed that attention acts equivalently in dual-task and visual search paradigms, based on the implicit assumption that visual attentional requirements can be defined along a single dimension. Here we show that there is no such equivalence: We report on targets that do not trigger pop-out, even though they can be discriminated from distractors with attention occupied elsewhere (natural scenes, color-orientation conjunctions); conversely, we show that certain targets that pop out among distractors need undivided attention to be effectively discriminated from distractors when presented in isolation (rotated L vs. +, depth-rotated cubes). In other words, visual search and dual-task performance reveal attentional resources along two independent dimensions. We suggest an interpretation of these results in terms of neuronal selectivities and receptive field size effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15006031     DOI: 10.1162/089892904322755502

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci        ISSN: 0898-929X            Impact factor:   3.225


  21 in total

1.  Is visual attention required for robust picture memory?

Authors:  Jeremy M Wolfe; Todd S Horowitz; Kristin O Michod
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2007-02-16       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  How the deployment of attention determines what we see.

Authors:  Anne Treisman
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2006-08-01

3.  Foveal analysis and peripheral selection during active visual sampling.

Authors:  Casimir J H Ludwig; J Rhys Davies; Miguel P Eckstein
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-01-02       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Cube search, revisited.

Authors:  Xuetao Zhang; Jie Huang; Serap Yigit-Elliott; Ruth Rosenholtz
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015-03-16       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Conscious access in the near absence of attention: critical extensions on the dual-task paradigm.

Authors:  Julian Matthews; Pia Schröder; Lisandro Kaunitz; Jeroen J A van Boxtel; Naotsugu Tsuchiya
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-09-19       Impact factor: 6.237

6.  The temporal dynamics of object processing in visual cortex during the transition from distributed to focused spatial attention.

Authors:  Chien-Te Wu; Melissa E Libertus; Karen L Meyerhoff; Marty G Woldorff
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2011-05-12       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  Global image properties do not guide visual search.

Authors:  Michelle R Greene; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2011-05-24       Impact factor: 2.240

Review 8.  Visual cognition.

Authors:  Patrick Cavanagh
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2011-02-15       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Detecting and remembering simultaneous pictures in a rapid serial visual presentation.

Authors:  Mary C Potter; Laura F Fox
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  The power of the feed-forward sweep.

Authors:  Rufin Vanrullen
Journal:  Adv Cogn Psychol       Date:  2008-07-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.