Setting up the target template in visual search.

Top-down knowledge about the target is essential in visual search. It biases visual attention to information that matches the target-defining criteria. Extensive research in the past has examined visual search when the target is defined by fixed criteria throughout the experiment, with few studies investigating how subjects set up the target. To address this issue, we conducted five experiments using random polygons and real-world objects, allowing the target criteria to change from trial to trial. On each trial, subjects first see a cue informing them about the target, followed 200-1000 ms later by the search array. We find that when the cue matches the target exactly, search speed increases and the slope of response time-set size function decreases. Deviations from the exact match in size or orientation slow down search speed, although they lead to faster speed compared with a neutral cue or a semantic cue. We conclude that the template set-up process uses detailed visual information, rather than schematic or semantic information, to find the target.

[1]  M. Tarr,et al.  Mental rotation and orientation-dependence in shape recognition , 1989, Cognitive Psychology.

[2]  M. Chun,et al.  Contextual Cueing: Implicit Learning and Memory of Visual Context Guides Spatial Attention , 1998, Cognitive Psychology.

[3]  M. Schmitter-Edgecombe,et al.  Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks following severe closed-head injury. , 2006, Neuropsychology.

[4]  DeLiang Wang,et al.  The role of priming in conjunctive visual search , 2002, Cognition.

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

[6]  R. Desimone,et al.  Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. , 1995, Annual review of neuroscience.

[7]  N. Meiran Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. , 1996 .

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

[9]  A. Allport,et al.  Task switching and the measurement of “switch costs” , 2000, Psychological research.

[10]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

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

[12]  Steven M. J. Hunt,et al.  MacProbe: A Macintosh-based experimenter’s workstation for the cognitive sciences , 1994 .

[13]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  Increased Activity in Human Visual Cortex during Directed Attention in the Absence of Visual Stimulation , 1999, Neuron.

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

[15]  Jeremy M. Wolfe,et al.  Just Say No: How Are Visual Searches Terminated When There Is No Target Present? , 1996, Cognitive Psychology.

[16]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. , 1977 .

[17]  A. Treisman,et al.  Conjunction search revisited. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[19]  M. Tarr Rotating objects to recognize them: A case study on the role of viewpoint dependency in the recognition of three-dimensional objects , 1995, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[20]  R. Desimone,et al.  Attention Increases Sensitivity of V4 Neurons , 2000, Neuron.

[21]  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.

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

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

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

[25]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: I , 1977 .