Dynamic Weighting of Feature Dimensions in Visual Search: Behavioral and Psychophysiological Evidence

Dimension-based accounts of visual search and selection have significantly contributed to the understanding of the cognitive mechanisms of attention. Extensions of the original approach assuming the existence of dimension-based feature contrast saliency signals that govern the allocation of focal attention have recently been employed to explain the spatial and temporal dynamics of the relative strengths of saliency representations. Here we review behavioral and neurophysiological findings providing evidence for the dynamic trial-by-trial weighting of feature dimensions in a variety of visual search tasks. The examination of the effects of feature and dimension-based inter-trial transitions in feature detection tasks shows that search performance is affected by the change of target-defining dimensions, but not features. The use of the redundant-signals paradigm shows that feature contrast saliency signals are integrated at a pre-selective processing stage. The comparison of feature detection and compound search tasks suggests that the relative significance of dimension-dependent and dimension-independent saliency representations is task-contingent. Empirical findings that explain reduced dimension-based effects in compound search tasks are discussed. Psychophysiological evidence is presented that confirms the assumption that the locus of the effects of feature dimension changes is perceptual pre-selective rather than post-selective response-based. Behavioral and psychophysiological results are considered within in the framework of the dimension weighting account of selective visual attention.

[1]  Stefan Pollmann,et al.  Anterior prefrontal cortex contributions to attention control. , 2004, Experimental psychology.

[2]  Klaus Gramann,et al.  Dimension-based attention modulates early visual processing. , 2010, Psychophysiology.

[3]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Priming of popout: II. Role of position , 1996 .

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

[5]  Jeff Miller,et al.  Divided attention: Evidence for coactivation with redundant signals , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[6]  H. Müller,et al.  Visual search for dimensionally redundant pop-out targets: Evidence for parallel-coactive processing of dimensions , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

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

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

[9]  M. Goldberg,et al.  Attention, intention, and priority in the parietal lobe. , 2010, Annual review of neuroscience.

[10]  A Treisman,et al.  Feature binding, attention and object perception. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[11]  H. Müller,et al.  Dimension intertrial and cueing effects in localization: support for pre-attentively weighted one-route models of saliency , 2011, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[12]  Alan Kingstone,et al.  Combining Expectancies , 1992 .

[13]  H J Müller,et al.  Top-down controlled visual dimension weighting: an event-related fMRI study. , 2002, Cerebral cortex.

[14]  D. Raab DIVISION OF PSYCHOLOGY: STATISTICAL FACILITATION OF SIMPLE REACTION TIMES* , 1962 .

[15]  Asher Cohen,et al.  Perceptual Dimensional Constraints in Response Selection Processes , 1997, Cognitive Psychology.

[16]  H. Egeth,et al.  Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Redundancy gains in pop-out visual search are determined by top-down task set: behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[18]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Display probability modulates attentional capture by onset distractors. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[19]  J. Theeuwes Perceptual selectivity for color and form , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  Uri Feintuch,et al.  Visual attention and coactivation of response decisions for features from different dimensions. , 2002, Psychological science.

[21]  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.

[22]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Expectancies modulate attentional capture by salient color singletons , 2008, Vision Research.

[23]  M. Goldberg,et al.  The representation of visual salience in monkey parietal cortex , 1998, Nature.

[24]  D. Raab Statistical facilitation of simple reaction times. , 1962, Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[25]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Inter-trial and redundant-signals effects in visual search and discrimination tasks: Separable pre-attentive and post-selective effects , 2010, Vision Research.

[26]  H. Müller,et al.  Visual search for dimensionally redundant pop-out targets: Redundancy gains in compound tasks , 2002 .

[27]  A. Hillstrom Repetition effects in visual search , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[28]  S J Luck,et al.  Spatial filtering during visual search: evidence from human electrophysiology. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[29]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Visual search for dimensionally redundant pop-out targets: parallel-coactive processing of dimensions is location specific. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[30]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Dimension- and space-based intertrial effects in visual pop-out search: modulation by task demands for focal-attentional processing , 2009, Psychological research.

[31]  H. Müller,et al.  Locus of dimension weighting: Preattentive or postselective? , 2006 .

[32]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Visual search for featural singletons: No top-down modulation, only bottom-up priming , 2006 .

[33]  Carly J. Leonard,et al.  Attentional guidance in singleton search: An examination of top-down, bottom-up, and intertrial factors , 2008 .

[34]  J. Theeuwes Cross-dimensional perceptual selectivity , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[35]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task , 1974 .

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

[37]  M. Eimer,et al.  Electrophysiological markers of visual dimension changes and response changes. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[38]  Ole Jensen,et al.  Oxford handbook of event-related potential components. , 2011 .

[39]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Response selection modulates visual search within and across dimensions. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[41]  M. Eimer The N2pc component as an indicator of attentional selectivity. , 1996, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[42]  Martin Eimer,et al.  The Lateralized Readiness Potential , 2003 .

[43]  Jillian H. Fecteau,et al.  Salience, relevance, and firing: a priority map for target selection , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[44]  S. Luck,et al.  Feature-based attention modulates feedforward visual processing , 2009, Nature Neuroscience.

[45]  A. Caramazza,et al.  On the speed of pop-out in feature search. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[46]  H. Müller,et al.  Searching for unknown feature targets on more than one dimension: Investigating a “dimension-weighting” account , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[47]  Robert Desimone,et al.  Parallel and Serial Neural Mechanisms for Visual Search in Macaque Area V4 , 2005, Science.

[48]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Brain electrical correlates of dimensional weighting: an ERP study. , 2007, Psychophysiology.

[49]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features , 1994, Memory & cognition.

[50]  S. Yantis,et al.  Selective visual attention and perceptual coherence , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[51]  H. J. Muller,et al.  Visual search for singleton feature targets across dimensions: Stimulus- and expectancy-driven effects in dimensional weighting. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[52]  S. Pollmann,et al.  A Fronto-Posterior Network Involved in Visual Dimension Changes , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[53]  H. Müller,et al.  Attentional capture by salient color singleton distractors is modulated by top-down dimensional set. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[54]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Dimension‐specific intertrial facilitation in visual search for pop‐out targets: Evidence for a top‐down modulable visual short‐term memory effect , 2004 .

[55]  Veit Stuphorn,et al.  Trial-by-trial adjustments of top-down set modulate oculomotor capture , 2011, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[56]  Hermann J. Müller,et al.  Perceptual Basis of Redundancy Gains in Visual Pop-out Search , 2011, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[57]  John H. R. Maunsell,et al.  Feature-based attention in visual cortex , 2006, Trends in Neurosciences.

[58]  Rolf Ulrich,et al.  Visuospatial attention and redundancy gain , 2009, Psychological research.

[59]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Priming of pop-out: II. The role of position , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[61]  S. Yantis,et al.  An interactive race model of divided attention. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[62]  M. Bravo,et al.  The role of attention in different visual-search tasks , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.