Literature DB >> 26200890

Allocation of attention during pursuit of large objects is no different than during fixation.

Scott N J Watamaniuk, Stephen J Heinen.   

Abstract

Attention allocation during pursuit of a spot is usually characterized as asymmetric with more attention placed ahead of the target than behind it. However, attention is symmetrically allocated across larger pursuit stimuli. An unresolved issue is how tightly attention is constrained on large stimuli during pursuit. Although some work shows it is tightly locked to the fovea, other work shows it is allocated flexibly. To investigate this, we had observers perform a character identification task on large pursuit stimuli composed of arrays of five, nine, or 15 characters spaced between 0.6° and 4.0° apart. Initially, the characters were identical, but at a random time, they all changed briefly, rendering one of them unique. Observers identified the unique character. Consistent with previous literature, attention appeared narrow and symmetric around the pursuit target for tightly spaced (0.6°) characters. Increasing spacing dramatically expanded the attention scope, presumably by mitigating crowding. However, when we controlled for crowding, performance was limited by set size, suffering more for eccentric targets. Interestingly, the same limitations on attention allocation were observed with stationary and pursued stimuli-evidence that attention operates similarly during fixation and pursuit of a stimulus that extends into the periphery. The results suggest that attention is flexibly allocated during pursuit, but performance is limited by crowding and set size. In addition, performing the identification task did not hurt pursuit performance, further evidence that pursuit of large stimuli is relatively inattentive.

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26200890      PMCID: PMC4511120          DOI: 10.1167/15.9.9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  39 in total

Review 1.  The allocation of attention during smooth pursuit eye movements.

Authors:  Paul Van Donkelaar; Anthony S Drew
Journal:  Prog Brain Res       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.453

2.  Anticipatory movement timing using prediction and external cues.

Authors:  Jeremy B Badler; Stephen J Heinen
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-04-26       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Unfocused spatial attention underlies the crowding effect in indirect form vision.

Authors:  Hans Strasburger
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2005-12-29       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Dynamics of attention during the initiation of smooth pursuit eye movements.

Authors:  David Souto; Dirk Kerzel
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2008-10-23       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Spatial integration in human smooth pursuit.

Authors:  S J Heinen; S N Watamaniuk
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

7.  The search for the neural mechanisms of the set size effect.

Authors:  Trenton A Jerde; Akiko Ikkai; Clayton E Curtis
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 3.386

8.  Endogenous and exogenous control of visual selection.

Authors:  J Theeuwes
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.490

9.  Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: evidence from visual search.

Authors:  S Yantis; J Jonides
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1984-10       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  Spatial allocation of attention during smooth pursuit eye movements.

Authors:  Lee P Lovejoy; Garth A Fowler; Richard J Krauzlis
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 1.886

View more
  3 in total

1.  Interference between smooth pursuit and color working memory.

Authors:  Shulin Yue; Zhenlan Jin; Fan Chenggui; Zhang Qian; Ling Li
Journal:  J Eye Mov Res       Date:  2017-07-10       Impact factor: 0.957

2.  The role of frontal pursuit area in interaction between smooth pursuit eye movements and attention: A TMS study.

Authors:  Zhenlan Jin; Ruie Gou; Junjun Zhang; Ling Li
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  From Gaussian blobs to naturalistic videos: Comparison of oculomotor behavior across different stimulus complexities.

Authors:  Alexander Goettker; Ioannis Agtzidis; Doris I Braun; Michael Dorr; Karl R Gegenfurtner
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2020-08-03       Impact factor: 2.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.