Template-to-distractor distinctiveness regulates visual search efficiency.

All models of attention include the concept of an attentional template (or a target or search template). The template is conceptualized as target information held in memory that is used for prioritizing sensory processing and determining if an object matches the target. It is frequently assumed that the template contains a veridical copy of the target. However, we review recent evidence showing that the template encodes a version of the target that is adapted to the current context (e.g. distractors, task, etc.); information held within the template may include only a subset of target features, real world knowledge, pre-existing perceptual biases, or even be a distorted version of the veridical target. We argue that the template contents are customized in order to maximize the ability to prioritize information that distinguishes targets from distractors. We refer to this as template-to-distractor distinctiveness and hypothesize that it contributes to visual search efficiency by exaggerating target-to-distractor dissimilarity.

[1]  M. Eimer.  The neural basis of attentional control in visual search , 2014, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[3]  C W ERIKSEN,et al.  Location of objects in a visual display as a function of the number of dimensions on which the objects differ. , 1952, Journal of experimental psychology.

[4]  Katharina N. Seidl-Rathkopf,et al.  Automatic guidance of attention during real-world visual search , 2015, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[5]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  The prefrontal cortex and the executive control of attention , 2008, Experimental Brain Research.

[6]  Alasdair D. F. Clarke,et al.  Seeing Beyond Salience and Guidance: The Role of Bias and Decision in Visual Search , 2019, Vision.

[7]  Eren Gunseli,et al.  Local and interregional alpha EEG dynamics dissociate between memory for search and memory for recognition , 2017, NeuroImage.

[8]  I. Biederman.  Perceiving Real-World Scenes , 1972, Science.

[9]  Taosheng Liu,et al.  Neural Determinants of Task Performance during Feature-Based Attention in Human Cortex , 2018, eNeuro.

[10]  H. Egeth,et al.  Searching for conjunctively defined targets. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  L. Chelazzi,et al.  Associative knowledge controls deployment of visual selective attention , 2003, Nature Neuroscience.

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

[13]  Antonio Torralba,et al.  Contextual guidance of eye movements and attention in real-world scenes: the role of global features in object search. , 2006, Psychological review.

[14]  C. Bundesen.  A theory of visual attention. , 1990, Psychological review.

[15]  Ken Nakayama,et al.  Visual search for object categories is predicted by the representational architecture of high-level visual cortex. , 2017, Journal of neurophysiology.

[16]  Nikolaus Kriegeskorte,et al.  Unique semantic space in the brain of each beholder predicts perceived similarity , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  Joy J Geng,et al.  Attentional capture by a perceptually salient non-target facilitates target processing through inhibition and rapid rejection. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[18]  Susan L. Franzel,et al.  Guided search: an alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[19]  Clayton Hickey,et al.  A temporal dependency account of attentional inhibition in oculomotor control , 2017, NeuroImage.

[20]  Michael C Hout,et al.  Target templates: the precision of mental representations affects attentional guidance and decision-making in visual search , 2015, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[21]  Edward Awh,et al.  Feature-Selective Attentional Modulations in Human Frontoparietal Cortex , 2016, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[22]  G. Woodman,et al.  Storage of features, conjunctions and objects in visual working memory. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[23]  Hany Farid,et al.  Observers change their target template based on expected context , 2016, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[24]  J. Serences,et al.  Optimal Deployment of Attentional Gain during Fine Discriminations , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[25]  Gregory J Zelinsky,et al.  Searching for Category-Consistent Features , 2016, Psychological science.

[26]  Stefan Pollmann,et al.  Neural correlates of visual dimension weighting , 2006 .

[27]  Yaoda Xu,et al.  Decoding the content of visual short-term memory under distraction in occipital and parietal areas , 2015, Nature Neuroscience.

[28]  C. Bundesen,et al.  A neural theory of visual attention: bridging cognition and neurophysiology. , 2005, Psychological review.

[29]  Michael Lindenbaum,et al.  Predicting visual search performance by quantifying stimuli similarities. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[30]  R. Goebel,et al.  Human Object-Similarity Judgments Reflect and Transcend the Primate-IT Object Representation , 2013, Front. Psychol..

[31]  Stefan Pollmann,et al.  Task relevance modulates the cortical representation of feature conjunctions in the target template , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[32]  Stefanie I. Becker,et al.  Visual search for color and shape: when is the gaze guided by feature relationships, when by feature values? , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[33]  J. Serences,et al.  Adaptive Allocation of Attentional Gain , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[34]  Stefanie I. Becker,et al.  The role of relational information in contingent capture. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[36]  J. Ryan,et al.  The intersection between the oculomotor and hippocampal memory systems: empirical developments and clinical implications , 2019, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[37]  Robert G Alexander,et al.  Visual similarity effects in categorical search. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[38]  D. Heeger,et al.  Categorical Clustering of the Neural Representation of Color , 2013, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[39]  Lee M. Miller,et al.  The Role of Alpha Activity in Spatial and Feature-Based Attention , 2016, eNeuro.

[40]  B. Green,et al.  Color coding in a visual search task. , 1956, Journal of experimental psychology.

[41]  Martin Eimer,et al.  Rapid guidance of visual search by object categories. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[42]  J. Duncan,et al.  Visual search and stimulus similarity. , 1989, Psychological review.

[43]  B. Anderson.  On the precision of goal-directed attentional selection. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[44]  J. Wolfe,et al.  The role of memory for visual search in scenes , 2015, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[45]  R. Nosofsky.  Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[46]  Stefanie I. Becker.  Determinants of Dwell Time in Visual Search: Similarity or Perceptual Difficulty? , 2011, PloS one.

[47]  Monica S. Castelhano,et al.  Peripheral guidance in scenes: The interaction of scene context and object content. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[48]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Parallel Distractor Rejection as a Binding Mechanism in Search , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[49]  Geoffrey F. Woodman,et al.  Attentional Templates in Visual Working Memory , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[50]  Daniel Baldauf,et al.  Neural mechanisms of object-based attention , 2014 .

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

[52]  George L. Malcolm,et al.  The effects of target template specificity on visual search in real-world scenes: evidence from eye movements. , 2009, Journal of vision.

[53]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Reuniting perception and conception , 1998, Cognition.

[54]  A. Nagy,et al.  Critical color differences determined with a visual search task. , 1990, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[55]  Hany Farid,et al.  Task Demands Determine the Specificity of the Search Template , 2022 .

[56]  Eren Gunseli,et al.  Effects of Search Difficulty on the Selection, Maintenance, and Learning of Attentional Templates , 2014, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[57]  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.

[58]  George L. Malcolm,et al.  Combining top-down processes to guide eye movements during real-world scene search. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[59]  Jonathan I. Flombaum,et al.  Stimulus-specific variability in color working memory with delayed estimation. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[60]  T. Moore,et al.  The What and Where of Visual Attention , 2015, Neuron.

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

[62]  Gregory J Zelinsky,et al.  Adding Details to the Attentional Template Offsets Search Difficulty: Evidence From Contralateral Delay Activity , 2017, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[63]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Early and late modulation of saccade deviations by target distractor similarity. , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

[64]  Richelle L. Witherspoon,et al.  How You Use It Matters , 2016, Psychological science.

[65]  Nikolaus Weiskopf,et al.  Causal evidence for frontal involvement in memory target maintenance by posterior brain areas during distracter interference of visual working memory , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[66]  Martin Eimer,et al.  The Time Course of Target Template Activation Processes during Preparation for Visual Search , 2018, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[67]  Joy J Geng,et al.  Idiosyncratic Patterns of Representational Similarity in Prefrontal Cortex Predict Attentional Performance , 2017, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[68]  P. Roelfsema,et al.  Different States in Visual Working Memory: When It Guides Attention and When It Does Not , 2022 .

[69]  L. Itti,et al.  Search Goal Tunes Visual Features Optimally , 2007, Neuron.

[70]  Edward Awh,et al.  The contralateral delay activity as a neural measure of visual working memory , 2016, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[71]  Martin Eimer,et al.  Item and category-based attentional control during search for real-world objects: Can you find the pants among the pans? , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[72]  Assaf Harel,et al.  What is special about expertise? Visual expertise reveals the interactive nature of real-world object recognition , 2016, Neuropsychologia.

[73]  H J Müller,et al.  Visual search for singleton feature targets within and across feature dimensions , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

[74]  Andrew B. Leber,et al.  Characterizing Individual Variation in the Strategic Use of Attentional Control , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[75]  Anna C. Nobre,et al.  Feature-based attentional weighting and spreading in visual working memory , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[76]  Jessica L. Irons,et al.  Choosing attentional control settings in a dynamically changing environment , 2016, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[77]  H. Pashler,et al.  Close binding of identity and location in visual feature perception. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[78]  Nicole M. Long,et al.  Bottom-Up and Top-Down Factors Differentially Influence Stimulus Representations Across Large-Scale Attentional Networks , 2018, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[79]  Heleen A Slagter,et al.  Inhibition in selective attention , 2020, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[80]  Fred H. Hamker,et al.  Open and closed loops: A computational approach to attention and consciousness , 2012, Advances in cognitive psychology.

[81]  Marius V Peelen,et al.  The contents of the search template for category-level search in natural scenes. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[82]  Joy J Geng,et al.  Distractor Probability Changes the Shape of the Attentional Template , 2017, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[83]  N. Kriegeskorte,et al.  Inverse MDS: Inferring Dissimilarity Structure from Multiple Item Arrangements , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[84]  Stefanie I. Becker,et al.  Oculomotor capture by colour singletons depends on intertrial priming , 2010, Vision Research.

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

[86]  J. Geng,et al.  The Attentional Template Is Shifted and Asymmetrically Sharpened by Distractor Context , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[87]  Tamaryn Menneer,et al.  Using multidimensional scaling to quantify similarity in visual search and beyond , 2015, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[88]  R. Desimone,et al.  Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. , 1995, Annual review of neuroscience.

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