Selecting and ignoring salient objects within and across dimensions in visual search

There are two strategies for selecting relevant information from a visual scene: according to either its salience or its relevance for behavioral goals. Although there is broad evidence for the existence of both mechanisms, there has been a debate concerning the impact of top-down control on salience-based selection. We investigated whether salient but irrelevant information is filtered by the visual system and what role the organization of the visual system plays in selection. Using event-related brain potentials (ERPs), we compared processing of the same salient objects when relevant versus irrelevant to the task at hand. Observers had to detect a target singleton defined in a specific dimension (e.g., orientation), while ignoring a singleton non-target defined in either another dimension (e.g., color; Experiment 1, requiring dimension-based search) or the same dimension (Experiment 2, requiring feature-based search). For dimension-based search, the results revealed an enhanced posterior N2, indicative of singleton selection, and an enhanced P3 for target singletons, but no difference between non-target singletons defined in another dimension and blank trials. Also, N2pc results indicated that the allocation of attention was modulated by the task. In contrast, for feature-based search, some ERP enhancement was also observed for non-target singletons (defined in the same dimension as the target) in the N2, N2pc, and P3 latency ranges. This pattern argues in favor of a strong top-down influence on singleton selection that operates on dimensions rather than features.

[1]  Martin Eimer,et al.  Attentional capture by visual singletons is mediated by top-down task set: new evidence from the N2pc component. , 2008, Psychophysiology.

[2]  Marvin M. Chun,et al.  Making use of texton gradients: visual search and perceptual grouping exploit the same parallel processes in different ways , 1995 .

[3]  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.

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

[5]  Erich Schröger,et al.  Visual distraction: a behavioral and event-related brain potential study in humans , 2006, Neuroreport.

[6]  Erich Schrger,et al.  A Neural Mechanism for Involuntary Attention Shifts to Changes in Auditory Stimulation , 1996, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[7]  S. Luck,et al.  Neural sources of focused attention in visual search. , 2000, Cerebral cortex.

[8]  H G Vaughan,et al.  The scalp topography of potentials in auditory and visual Go/NoGo tasks. , 1977, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[9]  R. Näätänen.  Attention and brain function , 1992 .

[10]  Geoffrey F Woodman,et al.  Serial deployment of attention during visual search. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

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

[13]  Geoffrey F. Woodman,et al.  Serial deployment of attention during visual search. , 2003 .

[14]  E. Donchin,et al.  On quantifying surprise: the variation of event-related potentials with subjective probability. , 1977, Psychophysiology.

[15]  G. McCarthy,et al.  Augmenting mental chronometry: the P300 as a measure of stimulus evaluation time. , 1977, Science.

[16]  Andrew B. Leber,et al.  Coordination of Voluntary and Stimulus-Driven Attentional Control in Human Cortex , 2005, Psychological science.

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

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

[19]  N. Lavie.  Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

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

[22]  S. Hochstein,et al.  Task difficulty and the specificity of perceptual learning , 1997, Nature.

[23]  B. Julesz.  Textons, the elements of texture perception, and their interactions , 1981, Nature.

[24]  C. Olivers,et al.  Feature priming in visual search does not depend on the dimensional context , 2008 .

[25]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Event-related brain potentials in the study of visual selective attention. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[26]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Electrophysiological Evidence of the Capture of Visual Attention , 2006, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[27]  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.

[28]  Piotr Jaskowski,et al.  Evidence for an Integrative Role of P3b in Linking Reaction to Perception , 2005 .

[29]  K. Cave,et al.  Top-down and bottom-up attentional control: On the nature of interference from a salient distractor , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[30]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The Event Related Cortical Potential as an Index of Task Workload , 1977 .

[31]  J. Driver,et al.  Control of Cognitive Processes: Attention and Performance XVIII , 2000 .

[32]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[33]  Charles L. Folk,et al.  Bottom-up priming of top-down attentional control settings , 2008 .

[34]  H. Nothdurft.  Feature analysis and the role of similarity in preattentive vision , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[35]  Kyle R Cave,et al.  Roles of salience and strategy in conjunction search. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[36]  C Meinecke,et al.  Automaticity and attention: investigating automatic processing in texture segmentation with event-related brain potentials. , 2001, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[37]  Andrea M Philipp,et al.  Effects of response selection on the task repetition benefit in task switching , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[38]  H. Nothdurft.  The role of features in preattentive vision: Comparison of orientation, motion and color cues , 1993, Vision Research.

[39]  E. Vogel,et al.  Electrophysiological Evidence for a Postperceptual Locus of Suppression during the Attentional Blink Time-based Attention and the Attentional Blink , 1998 .

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

[41]  P. Jolicoeur,et al.  The time course of the contingent spatial blink. , 2005, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[42]  S. Yantis,et al.  Visual Attention: Bottom-Up Versus Top-Down , 2004, Current Biology.

[43]  James R. Bergen,et al.  Parallel versus serial processing in rapid pattern discrimination , 1983, Nature.

[44]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  On the time course of top-down and bottom-up control of visual attention , 2000 .

[45]  H. J. Muller,et al.  Reflexive and voluntary orienting of visual attention: time course of activation and resistance to interruption. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[47]  S. Hochstein,et al.  How Serial is Serial Processing in Vision? , 1989, Perception.

[48]  S A Hillyard,et al.  Decision-related cortical potentials during an auditory signal detection task with cued observation intervals. , 1975, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[49]  Andrew B. Leber,et al.  Made you blink! Contingent attentional capture produces a spatial blink , 2002, Perception & psychophysics.

[50]  S. Luck,et al.  Bridging the Gap between Monkey Neurophysiology and Human Perception: An Ambiguity Resolution Theory of Visual Selective Attention , 1997, Cognitive Psychology.

[51]  Wieske van Zoest,et al.  Bottom-up and Top-down Control in Visual Search , 2004, Perception.

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

[53]  D. Alan Allport,et al.  SHIFTING INTENTIONAL SET - EXPLORING THE DYNAMIC CONTROL OF TASKS , 1994 .

[54]  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.

[55]  Frank E. Ritter,et al.  The Rise of Cognitive Architectures , 2007, Integrated Models of Cognitive Systems.

[56]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Changing your mind: on the contributions of top-down and bottom-up guidance in visual search for feature singletons. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[57]  E. Donchin,et al.  Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating? , 1988, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[58]  C. Koch,et al.  Computational modelling of visual attention , 2001, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[59]  Erich Schröger,et al.  Attentional resources and pop-out detection in search displays , 2007, Neuroreport.

[60]  S. Luck,et al.  Attention to Features Precedes Attention to Locations in Visual Search: Evidence from Electromagnetic Brain Responses in Humans , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

[62]  J. Theeuwes.  Top-down search strategies cannot override attentional capture , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[63]  S. Luck,et al.  Electrophysiological correlates of feature analysis during visual search. , 1994, Psychophysiology.

[64]  Martin Eimer,et al.  Involuntary Attentional Capture is Determined by Task Set: Evidence from Event-related Brain Potentials , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[65]  A. Treisman.  Features and Objects: The Fourteenth Bartlett Memorial Lecture , 1988, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[66]  J. Theeuwes.  Stimulus-driven capture and attentional set: selective search for color and visual abrupt onsets. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[67]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Cross-trial priming of element positions in visual pop-out search is dependent on stimulus arrangement. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[68]  Anna Schubö,et al.  Salience detection and attentional capture , 2009, Psychological research.

[69]  T. Goschke.  Intentional reconfiguration and involuntary persistence in task-set switching , 2000 .

[70]  I. Koch,et al.  The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[71]  Eric Ruthruff,et al.  Contingent attentional capture by top-down control settings: converging evidence from event-related potentials. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[72]  E. Donchin,et al.  Psychophysiology : systems, processes, and applications , 1987 .

[73]  N. Lavie,et al.  Frontal control of attentional capture in visual search , 2006 .

[74]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Cuing the dimension of a distractor: Verbal cues of target identity also benefit same-dimension distractor singletons , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[75]  Edmund Wascher,et al.  Visual search strategies are indexed by event-related lateralizations of the EEG , 2003, Biological Psychology.

[76]  R. Remington,et al.  Selectivity in distraction by irrelevant featural singletons: evidence for two forms of attentional capture. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[78]  Pierre Jolicoeur,et al.  Tracking the Location of Visuospatial Attention in a Contingent Capture Paradigm , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[79]  C. Olivers,et al.  On the dissociation between compound and present/absent tasks in visual search: Intertrial priming is ambiguity driven , 2006 .

[80]  Dominique Lamy,et al.  Attentional capture in singleton-detection and feature-search modes. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[81]  Dietmar Heinke,et al.  Working memory can guide pop-out search , 2006, Vision Research.

[82]  Christian N L Olivers,et al.  Attentional guidance by salient feature singletons depends on intertrial contingencies. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[83]  Steven A. Hillyard,et al.  Decision-related cortical potentials during an auditory signal detection task with cued observation intervals , 1975 .

[84]  E. Donchin,et al.  P300 and tracking difficulty: evidence for multiple resources in dual-task performance. , 1980, Psychophysiology.

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

[86]  Erich Schröger,et al.  Texture segmentation and visual search for pop-out targets. An ERP study. , 2004, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[87]  E. Amenedo,et al.  MMN in the visual modality: a review , 2003, Biological Psychology.