Spatial uncertainty explains exogenous and endogenous attentional cuing effects in visual signal detection.

Attentional cues may increase the detectability of a stimulus by increasing its signal-to-noise ratio (signal enhancement) or by increasing the efficiency of the observer's decision making by reducing uncertainty about the location of the stimulus (uncertainty reduction). Although signal enhancement has typically been found in detection tasks only when stimuli are backwardly masked, some recent studies have reported signal enhancement with unmasked stimuli under conditions of spatial uncertainty (E. L. Cameron, J. C. Tai, & M. Carrasco, 2002; M. Carrasco, C. Penpeci-Talgar, & M. Eckstein, 2000). To test whether these increases in sensitivity in unmasked displays were due to signal enhancement or uncertainty reduction, observers judged the orientation of unmasked Gabor patch stimuli in the presence or absence of fiducial markers that indicated their position in the display. Consistent with an uncertainty reduction hypothesis, cues produced large increases in sensitivity when stimuli were not localized perceptually but produced little or no systematic increase when they were localized by fiducial markers. The same general pattern of results was obtained with cues designed to engage the exogenous and endogenous orienting systems. The data suggest that, in practiced observers, the cuing effect for detecting unmasked stimuli is mainly due to uncertainty reduction.

[1]  Philip L. Smith Attention and luminance detection : A quantitative analysis , 1998 .

[2]  W H Teichner,et al.  Laws of visual choice reaction time. , 1974, Psychological review.

[3]  M. Carrasco,et al.  Covert attention affects the psychometric function of contrast sensitivity , 2002, Vision Research.

[4]  F A Wichmann,et al.  Ning for Helpful Comments and Suggestions. This Paper Benefited Con- Siderably from Conscientious Peer Review, and We Thank Our Reviewers the Psychometric Function: I. Fitting, Sampling, and Goodness of Fit , 2001 .

[5]  H. Hawkins,et al.  Visual attention modulates signal detectability. , 1990 .

[6]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  Comparison of two weighted integration models for the cueing task: linear and likelihood. , 2003, Journal of vision.

[7]  P Kramer,et al.  Uncertainty about spatial frequency, spatial position, or contrast of visual patterns , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. , 2004, Psychological review.

[9]  C. J. Downing Expectancy and visual-spatial attention: effects on perceptual quality. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  C. Koch,et al.  Spatial vision thresholds in the near absence of attention , 1997, Vision Research.

[11]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  An integrated theory of attention and decision making in visual signal detection. , 2009, Psychological review.

[12]  B. Dosher,et al.  Mechanisms of perceptual learning , 1999, Vision Research.

[13]  J. Palmer,et al.  Measuring the effect of attention on simple visual search. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  J. Findlay,et al.  Sensitivity and criterion effects in the spatial cuing of visual attention , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[15]  C. Koch,et al.  Attention activates winner-take-all competition among visual filters , 1999, Nature Neuroscience.

[16]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  Attention orienting and the time course of perceptual decisions: response time distributions with masked and unmasked displays , 2004, Vision Research.

[17]  William Prinzmetal,et al.  Attention: reaction time and accuracy reveal different mechanisms. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[18]  George Sperling,et al.  The information available in brief visual presentations. , 1960 .

[19]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  Attentional mechanisms in visual signal detection: The effects of simultaneous and delayed noise and pattern masks , 2007, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  Marilyn L Shaw,et al.  Attending to multiple sources of information: I. The integration of information in decision making , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[21]  J. P. Thomas,et al.  A signal detection model predicts the effects of set size on visual search accuracy for feature, conjunction, triple conjunction, and disjunction displays , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[22]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  A Theory of Memory Retrieval. , 1978 .

[23]  B. Dosher,et al.  External noise distinguishes attention mechanisms , 1998, Vision Research.

[24]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Response Times: Their Role in Inferring Elementary Mental Organization , 1986 .

[25]  W. P. Tanner PHYSIOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS OF PSYCHOPHYSICAL DATA * , 1961, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[26]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Sustained and transient components of focal visual attention , 1989, Vision Research.

[27]  Attending to multiple sources of information. I. The integration of information in decision making Volume 14, no. 3 (1982), by Marilyn L. Shaw, pages 353–409 , 1983, Cognitive Psychology.

[28]  D G Pelli,et al.  Uncertainty explains many aspects of visual contrast detection and discrimination. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[29]  Steven A. Hillyard,et al.  Effects of spatial cuing on luminance detectability: Psychophysical and electrophysiological evidence for early selection. , 1994 .

[30]  Andrew J. Sinclair,et al.  Mask-dependent attentional cuing effects in visual signal detection: The psychometric function for contrast , 2004, Perception & psychophysics.

[31]  L. Kaufman,et al.  Handbook of perception and human performance , 1986 .

[32]  T. Cohn,et al.  Detectability of a luminance increment: effect of spatial uncertainty. , 1974, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[33]  G W Humphreys,et al.  Luminance-increment detection: capacity-limited or not? , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[34]  Luis A. Lesmes,et al.  Spatial attention excludes external noise at the target location. , 2002, Journal of vision.

[35]  Bradley J Wolfgang,et al.  The attentional dynamics of masked detection. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[36]  M. Carrasco,et al.  Sustained and transient covert attention enhance the signal via different contrast response functions , 2006, Vision Research.

[37]  Preeti Verghese,et al.  The psychophysics of visual search , 2000, Vision Research.

[38]  H. Piéron,et al.  III. Nouvelles recherches sur l'analyse du temps de latence sensorielle et sur la loi qui relie ce temps à l'intensité d'excitation , 1920 .

[39]  O. Mimura [Eye movements]. , 1992, Nippon Ganka Gakkai zasshi.

[40]  D. Pins,et al.  On the relation between stimulus intensity and processing time: Piéron’s law and choice reaction time , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[41]  J F Stein,et al.  Does Attention Modulate the Perception of Luminance Changes? , 1992, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[42]  P. L. Smith,et al.  Attention and luminance detection: effects of cues, masks, and pedestals. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[43]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  The footprints of visual attention in the Posner cueing paradigm revealed by classification images. , 2002, Journal of vision.

[44]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[45]  Howard S. Bashinski,et al.  Enhancement of perceptual sensitivity as the result of selectively attending to spatial locations , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

[46]  J P Thomas,et al.  Bandwidths of orientation channels in human vision. , 1979, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[47]  Miguel P. Eckstein,et al.  The footprints of visual attention during search with 100% valid and 100% invalid cues , 2004, Vision Research.

[48]  H. J. Muller,et al.  Reflexive and voluntary orienting of visual attention: time course of activation and resistance to interruption. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[49]  R. Snowden,et al.  Attention to overlapping objects: detection and discrimination of luminance changes. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[50]  D. Burr,et al.  “Pop-out” of targets modulated in luminance or colour: the effect of intrinsic and extrinsic uncertainty , 2004, Vision Research.

[51]  W H Teichner,et al.  Laws of the simple visual reaction time. , 1972, Psychological review.

[52]  H. Pashler,et al.  Negligible Effect of Spatial Precuing on Identification of Single Digits , 1994 .

[53]  M. Posner,et al.  Orienting of Attention* , 1980, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[54]  J. M. Foley,et al.  Spatial attention: effect of position uncertainty and number of distractor patterns on the threshold-versus-contrast function for contrast discrimination , 1998 .

[55]  M. Shadlen,et al.  The effect of stimulus strength on the speed and accuracy of a perceptual decision. , 2005, Journal of vision.

[56]  B McElree,et al.  Covert attention accelerates the rate of visual information processing , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[57]  J. Jonides Voluntary versus automatic control over the mind's eye's movement , 1981 .

[58]  E Galanter,et al.  A significance test for one parameter isosensitivity functions , 1967, Psychometrika.

[59]  M. Carrasco,et al.  Spatial covert attention increases contrast sensitivity across the CSF: support for signal enhancement , 2000, Vision Research.