Effects of location and form cuing on the allocation of attention in the visual field.

Two experiments were conducted which tested the effect of two different types of cues on the allocation of attention in the visual field. Subjects responded to a target appearing either 6.5 degrees to the right or to the left of fixation in a field filled with small randomly positioned line segments. The target form was either a circle or diamond in which a horizontal or vertical line segment was positioned. Subjects made a speeded discrimination response on the basis of the orientation of this line segment. In the first experiment, there was always one target at each trial. In the second experiment, both circle and diamond were presented left or right of fixation simultaneously whereby the line segment only appeared in one of the forms. In different conditions, the most likely target location (left or right) and form (circle or diamond) were cued. Control conditions served as a baseline for determining costs and benefits. Reaction time measures showed that the validity of the location cue resulted in both costs and benefits, whereas the validity of the form cue had no such effects. The results cannot be reconciled with the claim of zoom lens theories that spatial attention can switch between different modes of operations. They are also at odds with theories that claim that attention has no spatial locus. The results are consistent with a simple spotlight theory in which spatial attention involves selecting a particular restricted area of the visual field for which the perceptual efficiency is enhanced.

[1]  R. Remington,et al.  Moving attention: Evidence for time-invariant shifts of visual selective attention , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[2]  Joseph S. Lappin,et al.  Does prior knowledge facilitate the detection of visual targets in random noise? , 1976 .

[3]  J. Hoffman,et al.  Spatial selectivity in visual search , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[4]  J. Jonides,et al.  On the Cost and Benefit of Cost and Benefit , 1984 .

[5]  J. Juola,et al.  Voluntary control of attention near the fovea. , 1987, Acta psychologica.

[6]  M. Posner,et al.  Attention and the detection of signals. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology.

[7]  D. Broadbent.  Task combination and selective intake of information. , 1982, Acta psychologica.

[8]  Y. Tsal.  Movements of attention across the visual field. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  B. Bergum,et al.  Attention and performance IX , 1982 .

[10]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Allocation of attention in the visual field. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  G. Shulman,et al.  Spatial determinants of the distribution of attention , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.

[12]  D. LaBerge.  Spatial extent of attention to letters and words. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  M. Posner,et al.  Does attention affect visual feature integration? , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  A. Lambert,et al.  Expecting different categories at different locations and spatial selective attention. , 1987, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[15]  S. Yantis.  On analog movements of visual attention , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  A. Treisman,et al.  Illusory conjunctions in the perception of objects , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[17]  G. Shulman,et al.  Moving attention through visual space. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  Charles Curtis Eriksen,et al.  The extent of processing of noise elements during selective encoding from visual displays , 1973 .

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

[20]  A. Lambert,et al.  Selective attention and performance with a multidimensional visual display. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  M. Posner.  Chronometric explorations of mind : the third Paul M. Fitts lectures, delivered at the University of Michigan, September 1976 , 1978 .

[22]  J. Duncan,et al.  Directing attention in the visual field , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[23]  J. Jonides.  Further toward a model of the Mind’s eye’s movement , 1983 .

[24]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Temporal and spatial characteristics of selective encoding from visual displays , 1972 .

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

[26]  Y Tsal,et al.  On interpreting the effects of location preknowledge: A critique of Duncan , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[27]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Movement of attentional focus across the visual field: A critical look at the evidence , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[29]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.