Motion disrupts dynamic visual search for an orientation change

Visual search in dynamic environments, for example lifeguarding or CCTV monitoring, has several fundamentally different properties to standard visual search tasks. The visual environment is constantly moving, a range of items could become targets and the task is to search for a certain event. We developed a novel task in which participants were required to search static and moving displays for an orientation change thus capturing components of visual search, multiple object tracking and change detection paradigms. In Experiment 1, we found that the addition of moving distractors slowed participants’ response time to detect an orientation changes in a moving target, showing that the motion of distractors disrupts the rapid detection of orientation changes in a moving target. In Experiment 2 we found that, in displays of both moving and static objects, response time was slower if a moving object underwent a change than if a static object did, thus demonstrating that motion of the target itself also disrupts the detection of an orientation change. Our results could have implications for training in real-world occupations where the task is to search a dynamic environment for a critical event. Moreover, we add to the literature highlighting the need to develop lab-based tasks with high experimental control from any real-world tasks researchers may wish to investigate rather than extrapolating from static visual search tasks to more dynamic environments.

[1]  Derrick G. Watson,et al.  Visual search in a multi-element asynchronous dynamic (MAD) world. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[2]  Hilda M. Fehd,et al.  Looking at the center of the targets helps multiple object tracking. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[3]  Markus Huff,et al.  Studying visual attention using the multiple object tracking paradigm: A tutorial review , 2017, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[4]  Jukka Hyönä,et al.  Dynamic binding of identity and location information: A serial model of multiple identity tracking , 2008, Cognitive Psychology.

[5]  R. Abrams,et al.  The onset of receding motion captures attention: Comment on Franconeri and Simons (2003) , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[6]  Z. Pylyshyn,et al.  Multiple object tracking and attentional processing. , 2000, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[7]  Bahador Bahrami,et al.  Object property encoding and change blindness in multiple object tracking , 2003 .

[8]  J. Theeuwes Abrupt luminance change pops out; abrupt color change does not , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

[9]  Naomi M. Kenner,et al.  How fast can you change your mind? The speed of top-down guidance in visual search , 2004, Vision Research.

[10]  Christopher Kent,et al.  Goal-directed unequal attention allocation during multiple object tracking , 2019, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[11]  J. Enns,et al.  Measuring Preattentive Processes: When is Pop-out Not Enough? , 1997 .

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

[13]  S. Yantis Multielement visual tracking: Attention and perceptual organization , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[14]  Ernst-Joachim Hossner,et al.  Detecting single-target changes in multiple object tracking: The case of peripheral vision , 2016, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[15]  Steven J. Landry,et al.  A methodology for studying cognitive groupings in a target-tracking task , 2001, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst..

[16]  Jon Driver,et al.  Visual search for a conjunction of movement and form is parallel , 1988, Nature.

[17]  Jonathan I. Flombaum,et al.  Attentional resources in visual tracking through occlusion: The high-beams effect , 2008, Cognition.

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

[19]  Z. Pylyshyn,et al.  Selective nontarget inhibition in Multiple Object Tracking , 2008 .

[20]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Pip and pop: nonspatial auditory signals improve spatial visual search. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  Hilda M. Fehd,et al.  Eye movements during multiple object tracking: Where do participants look? , 2008, Cognition.

[22]  Jordan W. Suchow,et al.  Motion Silences Awareness of Visual Change , 2011, Current Biology.

[23]  D. Crundall,et al.  The effect of lifeguard experience upon the detection of drowning victims in a realistic dynamic visual search task , 2018 .

[24]  Joseph L. Mundy,et al.  Change Detection , 2014, Computer Vision, A Reference Guide.

[25]  Manfred MacKeben,et al.  Eye movement control during single-word reading in dyslexics. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[26]  Ardhendu Behera,et al.  Suspiciousness perception in dynamic scenes: a comparison of CCTV operators and novices , 2013, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[27]  D. Simons,et al.  Moving and looming stimuli capture attention , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[28]  Piers D L Howe,et al.  Extrapolation occurs in multiple object tracking when eye movements are controlled , 2015, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[29]  Ardhendu Behera,et al.  Task relevance predicts gaze in videos of real moving scenes , 2011, Experimental Brain Research.

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

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

[32]  Ernst-Joachim Hossner,et al.  Disentangling vision and attention in multiple-object tracking: How crowding and collisions affect gaze anchoring and dual-task performance. , 2017, Journal of vision.

[33]  Jay Pratt,et al.  It’s Alive! , 2010, Psychological science.

[34]  R. Abrams,et al.  Onset but not offset of irrelevant motion disrupts inhibition of return , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[35]  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.

[36]  Johan Hulleman,et al.  No need for inhibitory tagging of locations in visual search , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[37]  Johan Hulleman,et al.  Inhibitory tagging in visual search: Only in difficult search are items tagged individually , 2010, Vision Research.

[38]  Hilde van der Togt,et al.  Publisher's Note , 2003, J. Netw. Comput. Appl..

[39]  Stefanie I. Becker,et al.  The role of target-distractor relationships in guiding attention and the eyes in visual search. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[40]  S. Tripathy,et al.  Severe loss of positional information when detecting deviations in multiple trajectories. , 2004, Journal of vision.

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