Orientation categories used in guidance of attention in visual search can differ in strength

We investigated orientation categories in the guidance of attention in visual search. In the first two experiments, participants had a limited amount of time to find a target line among distractors lines. We systematically varied the orientation of the target and the angular difference between the target and distractors. We find vertical, horizontal, and 45° targets require the least target/distractor angular difference to be found reliably and that the rate at which increases in target/distractor difference decrease search difficulty to be independent of target identity. Unexpectedly, even when the angular difference between the target and distractors was large, search performance was never optimal when the target orientation was 45°. A third experiment investigates this unexpected finding by correlating target/distractor difference and error rate with performance on tasks that measure a specific perceptual or cognitive ability. We find that the elevated error rate is correlated with performance on stimulus recognition and identification tasks, while the amount of target/distractor difference needed to detect the target reliably is correlated with performance on a stimulus reproduction task. We conclude that the target/distractor difference reveals the number of orientation categories in visual search, and, accordingly, that there are four such categories: two strong ones centred on 0° and 90° and two weak ones centred on 45° and 135°.

[1]  Bevil R. Conway,et al.  Evolution of neural computations: Mantis shrimp and human color decoding , 2014, i-Perception.

[2]  David Alais,et al.  An investigation of linear separability in visual search for color suggests a role of recognizability. , 2016, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  S P Arun,et al.  Does linear separability really matter? Complex visual search is explained by simple search. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[4]  D. Hubel,et al.  Sequence regularity and geometry of orientation columns in the monkey striate cortex , 1974, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[5]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Five factors that guide attention in visual search , 2017, Nature Human Behaviour.

[6]  Martin Arguin,et al.  Conjunction and linear non-separability effects in visual shape encoding , 2000, Vision Research.

[7]  Keiji Uchikawa,et al.  Color category influences heterogeneous visual search for color. , 2005, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[8]  Jonathan I. Flombaum,et al.  Why some colors appear more memorable than others: A model combining categories and particulars in color working memory. , 2015, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[9]  S. Appelle.  Perception and discrimination as a function of stimulus orientation: the "oblique effect" in man and animals. , 1972, Psychological bulletin.

[10]  W. Korte,et al.  Über die Gestaltauffassung im indirekten Sehen , 1923 .

[11]  Ronald A. Rensink,et al.  Sensitivity To Three-Dimensional Orientation in Visual Search , 1990 .

[12]  H. BOUMA,et al.  Interaction Effects in Parafoveal Letter Recognition , 1970, Nature.

[13]  Stefanie I. Becker,et al.  Irrelevant singletons in pop-out search: attentional capture or filtering costs? , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Guided Search 2.0 A revised model of visual search , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[15]  L. Cronbach,et al.  Construct validity in psychological tests. , 1955, Psychological bulletin.

[16]  BELA JULESZ,et al.  Rapid discrimination of visual patterns , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[17]  Jeremy M. Wolfe,et al.  Guided Search 4.0: Current Progress With a Model of Visual Search , 2007, Integrated Models of Cognitive Systems.

[18]  E. Reingold,et al.  Visual search asymmetry: The influence of stimulus familiarity and low-level features , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[19]  G W Humphreys,et al.  Driving attention with the top down: The relative contribution of target templates to the linear separability effect in the size dimension , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[21]  P. Malinowski,et al.  The effect of familiarity on visual-search performance: Evidence for learned basic features , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[22]  Bevil R. Conway,et al.  Cerebral Cortex Advance Access published December 28, 2005 Color Architecture in Alert Macaque Cortex , 2022 .

[23]  G. F. Cooper,et al.  Development of the Brain depends on the Visual Environment , 1970, Nature.

[24]  Zijiang J. He,et al.  Surfaces versus features in visual search , 1992, Nature.

[25]  J. Wolfe,et al.  The role of categorization in visual search for orientation. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[26]  Eren Gunseli,et al.  Is a search template an ordinary working memory? Comparing electrophysiological markers of working memory maintenance for visual search and recognition , 2014, Neuropsychologia.

[27]  Yuhong Jiang,et al.  Setting up the target template in visual search. , 2005, Journal of vision.

[28]  A Treisman,et al.  Feature analysis in early vision: evidence from search asymmetries. , 1988, Psychological review.

[29]  Damien J. Mannion,et al.  Orientation anisotropies in human visual cortex. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[30]  G. Svaetichin,et al.  Spectral response curves from single cones. , 1956, Acta physiologica Scandinavica. Supplementum.

[31]  Colin W. G. Clifford,et al.  Orientation anisotropies in human primary visual cortex depend on contrast , 2015, NeuroImage.

[32]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[33]  W. Cowan,et al.  Visual search for colour targets that are or are not linearly separable from distractors , 1996, Vision Research.

[34]  D. Foster,et al.  Asymmetries in oriented-line detection indicate two orthogonal filters in early vision , 1991, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[35]  P Cavanagh,et al.  Familiarity and pop-out in visual search , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[36]  M. Eimer,et al.  On the difference between working memory and attentional set , 2011, Neuropsychologia.

[37]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Which end is up? Two representations of orientation in visual search , 1999, Vision Research.

[38]  P. Lennie,et al.  Chromatic mechanisms in lateral geniculate nucleus of macaque. , 1984, The Journal of physiology.

[39]  B. Julesz,et al.  Human factors and behavioral science: Textons, the fundamental elements in preattentive vision and perception of textures , 1983, The Bell System Technical Journal.

[40]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Feature-based memory-driven attentional capture: visual working memory content affects visual attention. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[41]  J. Wolfe,et al.  What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it? , 2004, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[42]  Michael D'Zmura,et al.  Color in visual search , 1991, Vision Research.

[43]  J. Wolfe,et al.  On the Role of Symmetry in Visual Search , 1992 .