Literature DB >> 21607814

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

Melissa L-H Võ1, John M Henderson.   

Abstract

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.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21607814     DOI: 10.3758/s13414-011-0150-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.199


  27 in total

1.  The attraction of visual attention to texts in real-world scenes.

Authors:  Hsueh-Cheng Wang; Marc Pomplun
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2012-06-19       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  Rapid apprehension of the coherence of action scenes.

Authors:  Reinhild Glanemann; Pienie Zwitserlood; Jens Bölte; Christian Dobel
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-10

3.  Modeling guidance and recognition in categorical search: bridging human and computer object detection.

Authors:  Gregory J Zelinsky; Yifan Peng; Alexander C Berg; Dimitris Samaras
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-10-08       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Cat and mouse search: the influence of scene and object analysis on eye movements when targets change locations during search.

Authors:  Anne P Hillstrom; Joice D Segabinazi; Hayward J Godwin; Simon P Liversedge; Valerie Benson
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2017-01-02       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  Gist in time: Scene semantics and structure enhance recall of searched objects.

Authors:  Emilie L Josephs; Dejan Draschkow; Jeremy M Wolfe; Melissa L-H Võ
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2016-06-03

6.  EEG signatures of contextual influences on visual search with real scenes.

Authors:  Amir H Meghdadi; Barry Giesbrecht; Miguel P Eckstein
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 7.  The role of memory for visual search in scenes.

Authors:  Melissa Le-Hoa Võ; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2015-02-12       Impact factor: 5.691

8.  Statistics of high-level scene context.

Authors:  Michelle R Greene
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-10-29

9.  Mind the step: complementary effects of an implicit task on eye and head movements in real-life gaze allocation.

Authors:  Bernard Marius 't Hart; Wolfgang Einhäuser
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-09-22       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  The Linguistic Analysis of Scene Semantics: LASS.

Authors:  Dylan Rose; Peter Bex
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2020-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.