Literature DB >> 15559106

Attentional weighting: a possible account of visual field asymmetries in visual search?

Amy A Rezec1, Karen R Dobkins.   

Abstract

Several previous visual search studies measuring reaction times have demonstrated scanning biases across the visual field (i.e. a tendency to begin a serial search in a particular region of space). In the present study, we measured visual discrimination thresholds for a target presented amongst distractors using displays that were short enough to greatly reduce the potential for serial (i.e. scanning) search. For both a motion and orientation task, subjects' performance was significantly better when the target appeared in the inferior, as compared to the superior, visual field (no differences were observed between left and right visual fields). These findings suggest that subjects may divide attention unevenly across the visual field when searching for a target amongst distractors, a phenomenon we refer to as 'attentional weighting'. To rule out the possibility that these visual field asymmetries were sensory in nature, thresholds were also measured for conditions in which subjects' attention was directed to the location of the target stimulus, either because it was presented alone in the display or because a spatial cue directed subjects' attention to the location of that target presented amongst distractors. Under these conditions, visual field asymmetries were smaller (or non-existent), suggesting that sensory factors (such as crowding) are unlikely to account for our results. In addition, analyses of set-size effects (obtained by comparing thresholds for a single target vs. the target presented amongst distractors) could be accounted for by an unlimited capacity model, suggesting that multiple stimuli can be processed simultaneously without any limitations at an early stage of sensory processing. Taken together, these findings suggest the possible existence of biases in attentional weighting at a late stage of processing. The bias appears to favor the inferior visual field, which may arise from the fact that there is more ecologically-relevant information in this region of space.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15559106     DOI: 10.1163/1568568041920203

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spat Vis        ISSN: 0169-1015


  16 in total

1.  Attention searches nonuniformly in space and in time.

Authors:  Laura Dugué; Douglas McLelland; Mathilde Lajous; Rufin VanRullen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Apparent contrast differs across the vertical meridian: visual and attentional factors.

Authors:  Stuart Fuller; Ruby Z Rodriguez; Marisa Carrasco
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2008-01-24       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Perception of differences in naturalistic dynamic scenes, and a V1-based model.

Authors:  Michelle P S To; Iain D Gilchrist; David J Tolhurst
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015-01-16       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Individual differences in visual field shape modulate the effects of attention on the lower visual field advantage in crowding.

Authors:  Francesca C Fortenbaugh; Michael A Silver; Lynn C Robertson
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015-02-12       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Effects of spatial attention on motion discrimination are greater in the left than right visual field.

Authors:  Rain G Bosworth; Jennifer A F Petrich; Karen R Dobkins
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2011-10-23       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  Isoeccentric locations are not equivalent: the extent of the vertical meridian asymmetry.

Authors:  Jared Abrams; Aaron Nizam; Marisa Carrasco
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 1.886

7.  Brightness induction and suprathreshold vision: effects of age and visual field.

Authors:  Mark E McCourt; Lynnette M Leone; Barbara Blakeslee
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2014-11-21       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  The what and why of perceptual asymmetries in the visual domain.

Authors:  A K M Rezaul Karim; Haruyuki Kojima
Journal:  Adv Cogn Psychol       Date:  2010-12-15

9.  Gaining the upper hand: evidence of vertical asymmetry in sex-categorisation of human hands.

Authors:  Genevieve L Quek; Matthew Finkbeiner
Journal:  Adv Cogn Psychol       Date:  2014-12-31

10.  Spatial probability dynamically modulates visual target detection in chickens.

Authors:  Devarajan Sridharan; Deepa L Ramamurthy; Eric I Knudsen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-05-29       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.