Objects on a Collision Path With the Observer Demand Attention

How observers distribute limited processing resources to regions of a scene is based on a dynamic balance between current goals and reflexive tendencies. Past research showed that these reflexive tendencies include orienting toward objects that expand as if they were looming toward the observer, presumably because this signal indicates an impending collision. Here we report that during visual search, items that loom abruptly capture attention more strongly when they approach from the periphery rather than from near the center of gaze (Experiment 1), and target objects are more likely to be attended when they are on a collision path with the observer rather than on a near-miss path (Experiment 2). Both effects are exaggerated when search is performed in a large projection dome (Experiment 3). These findings suggest that the human visual system prioritizes events that are likely to require a behaviorally urgent response.

[1]  A. Metha,et al.  Detection and discrimination of moving stimuli: the effects of color, luminance, and eccentricity. , 1994, Journal of The Optical Society of America A-optics Image Science and Vision.

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

[3]  James A. Caviness,et al.  Persistent Fear Responses in Rhesus Monkeys to the Optical Stimulus of "Looming" , 1962, Science.

[4]  A. V. van den Berg,et al.  Collision judgment of objects approaching the head , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.

[5]  C. Koch,et al.  Visual Selective Behavior Can Be Triggered by a Feed-Forward Process , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[6]  W. Ball,et al.  Infant Responses to Impending Collision: Optical and Real , 1971, Science.

[7]  R. Gurnsey,et al.  Identification of 3D shape from texture and motion across the visual field. , 2006, Journal of vision.

[8]  S. Yantis,et al.  Visual attention: control, representation, and time course. , 1997, Annual review of psychology.

[9]  Bruce C Hansen,et al.  Peripheral vision: good for biological motion, bad for signal noise segregation? , 2007, Journal of vision.

[10]  M. Goodale,et al.  The visual brain in action , 1995 .

[11]  Hassenstein,et al.  Hiding responses of locusts to approaching objects , 1999, The Journal of experimental biology.

[12]  C W Tyler,et al.  Analysis of visual modulation sensitivity. II. Peripheral retina and the role of photoreceptor dimensions. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[13]  M. Bar A Cortical Mechanism for Triggering Top-Down Facilitation in Visual Object Recognition , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[14]  Arne Öhman,et al.  The role of the amygdala in human fear: Automatic detection of threat , 2005, Psychoneuroendocrinology.

[15]  M. Cynader,et al.  The visual perception of motion in depth. , 1979, Scientific American.

[16]  B. Frost,et al.  Time to collision is signalled by neurons in the nucleus rotundus of pigeons , 1992, Nature.

[17]  Leslie G. Ungerleider Two cortical visual systems , 1982 .