Literature DB >> 30353498

Meaning guides attention during scene viewing, even when it is irrelevant.

Candace E Peacock1,2, Taylor R Hayes3, John M Henderson3,4.   

Abstract

During real-world scene viewing, humans must prioritize scene regions for attention. What are the roles of low-level image salience and high-level semantic meaning in attentional prioritization? A previous study suggested that when salience and meaning are directly contrasted in scene memorization and preference tasks, attentional priority is assigned by meaning (Henderson & Hayes in Nature Human Behavior, 1, 743-747, 2017). Here we examined the role of meaning in attentional guidance using two tasks in which meaning was irrelevant and salience was relevant: a brightness rating task and a brightness search task. Meaning was represented by meaning maps that captured the spatial distribution of semantic features. Meaning was contrasted with image salience, represented by saliency maps. Critically, both maps were represented similarly, allowing us to directly compare how meaning and salience influenced the spatial distribution of attention, as measured by fixation density maps. Our findings suggest that even in tasks for which meaning is irrelevant and salience is relevant, meaningful scene regions are prioritized for attention over salient scene regions. These results support theories in which scene semantics play a dominant role in attentional guidance in scenes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Attention; Eye movements; Meaning; Salience; Scene perception

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30353498      PMCID: PMC6384129          DOI: 10.3758/s13414-018-1607-7

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


  25 in total

Review 1.  High-level scene perception.

Authors:  J M Henderson; A Hollingworth
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 24.137

Review 2.  In what ways do eye movements contribute to everyday activities?

Authors:  M F Land; M Hayhoe
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Visual memory and motor planning in a natural task.

Authors:  Mary M Hayhoe; Anurag Shrivastava; Ryan Mruczek; Jeff B Pelz
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.240

Review 4.  Eye movements in natural behavior.

Authors:  Mary Hayhoe; Dana Ballard
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 20.229

5.  Contextual guidance of eye movements and attention in real-world scenes: the role of global features in object search.

Authors:  Antonio Torralba; Aude Oliva; Monica S Castelhano; John M Henderson
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 8.934

6.  Modeling the role of salience in the allocation of overt visual attention.

Authors:  Derrick Parkhurst; Klinton Law; Ernst Niebur
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 1.886

Review 7.  Computational modelling of visual attention.

Authors:  L Itti; C Koch
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 34.870

8.  Modeling the influence of task on attention.

Authors:  Vidhya Navalpakkam; Laurent Itti
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Search goal tunes visual features optimally.

Authors:  Vidhya Navalpakkam; Laurent Itti
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2007-02-15       Impact factor: 17.173

10.  The role of memory in guiding attention during natural vision.

Authors:  Ran Carmi; Laurent Itti
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2006-08-10       Impact factor: 2.240

View more
  14 in total

1.  Where the action could be: Speakers look at graspable objects and meaningful scene regions when describing potential actions.

Authors:  Gwendolyn Rehrig; Candace E Peacock; Taylor R Hayes; John M Henderson; Fernanda Ferreira
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2020-04-09       Impact factor: 3.051

2.  Scene semantics involuntarily guide attention during visual search.

Authors:  Taylor R Hayes; John M Henderson
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2019-10

3.  The role of meaning in attentional guidance during free viewing of real-world scenes.

Authors:  Candace E Peacock; Taylor R Hayes; John M Henderson
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2019-07-11

4.  Rapid Extraction of the Spatial Distribution of Physical Saliency and Semantic Informativeness from Natural Scenes in the Human Brain.

Authors:  John E Kiat; Taylor R Hayes; John M Henderson; Steven J Luck
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2021-11-08       Impact factor: 6.709

5.  Look at what I can do: Object affordances guide visual attention while speakers describe potential actions.

Authors:  Gwendolyn Rehrig; Madison Barker; Candace E Peacock; Taylor R Hayes; John M Henderson; Fernanda Ferreira
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 2.157

6.  Oversampling of minority categories drives misperceptions of group compositions.

Authors:  Mel W Khaw; Rachel Kranton; Scott Huettel
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2021-05-08

Review 7.  Meaning and Attentional Guidance in Scenes: A Review of the Meaning Map Approach.

Authors:  John M Henderson; Taylor R Hayes; Candace E Peacock; Gwendolyn Rehrig
Journal:  Vision (Basel)       Date:  2019-05-10

Review 8.  The Changing Landscape: High-Level Influences on Eye Movement Guidance in Scenes.

Authors:  Carrick C Williams; Monica S Castelhano
Journal:  Vision (Basel)       Date:  2019-06-28

9.  When scenes speak louder than words: Verbal encoding does not mediate the relationship between scene meaning and visual attention.

Authors:  Gwendolyn Rehrig; Taylor R Hayes; John M Henderson; Fernanda Ferreira
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2020-10

10.  Center Bias Does Not Account for the Advantage of Meaning Over Salience in Attentional Guidance During Scene Viewing.

Authors:  Candace E Peacock; Taylor R Hayes; John M Henderson
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-07-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.