Visual search for feature singletons: multiple mechanisms produce sequence effects in visual search.

Selection of a feature singleton target in visual search tasks, e.g., a red target among green distractors, is very fast--as if the target "popped out" of the display. Interestingly, reaction times (RTs) sometimes even decrease with an increase in the number of distractors (while keeping the presentation area fixed), i.e., there is a negative RT/display density relationship. Furthermore, repeating--versus changing--target-defining properties across trials also speeds up RTs. The present study investigated how display density influences two similar but dissociable types of such intertrial effects, namely (a) priming of pop-out (PoP), observed when the target-defining dimension is fixed, e.g., color, and only the features of the target and distractors, e.g., red and green, vary across trials and (b) the dimension-repetition effect (DRE), observed when both the features and dimensions of the target vary, e.g., from red circle (color) to blue square (shape target) among blue circles. Experiment 1 examined PoP magnitude with sparse (three-item) versus dense (36-item) displays in conditions in which the distractors' color either (a) varied, i.e., red target, green distractors versus green target, red distractors, or (b) it was fixed (blue). Significant PoP was observed only for sparse distractors conditions. Experiment 2 investigated the DRE magnitude across display densities with distractors always being fixed: Significant DREs of comparable magnitude were observed with both sparse and dense displays. This dissociation between the PoP and DREs suggests, first, the existence of multiple mechanisms of intertrial effects and, second, that PoP is specific to low target-distractor signal-to-noise ratios when the target fails to pop out.

[1]  Eds L. Itti,et al.  The primary visual cortex creates a bottom-up saliency map , 2005 .

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

[3]  Harold Pashler,et al.  Expectation and repetition effects in searching for featural singletons in very brief displays , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[4]  Dragan Rangelov,et al.  Independent dimension-weighting mechanisms for visual selection and stimulus identification. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[5]  Dominique Lamy,et al.  Refining the dual-stage account of intertrial feature priming: Does motor response or response feature matter? , 2011, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[6]  Jonathan W. Peirce,et al.  PsychoPy—Psychophysics software in Python , 2007, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[7]  Dragan Rangelov,et al.  Dimension-specific intertrial priming effects are task-specific: evidence for multiple weighting systems. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  V. Maljkovic,et al.  Implicit short-term memory and event frequency effects in visual search , 2005, Vision Research.

[9]  Christian N. L. Olivers,et al.  Intertrial priming stemming from ambiguity: A new account of priming in visual search , 2006 .

[10]  Árni Kristjánsson,et al.  Episodic retrieval and feature facilitation in intertrial priming of visual search , 2011, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

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

[12]  Li Zhaoping,et al.  The Primary Visual Cortex Creates a Bottom-up Saliency Map , 2005 .

[13]  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 .

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

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

[16]  Dominique Lamy,et al.  The role of search difficulty in intertrial feature priming , 2011, Vision Research.

[17]  G. Logan The CODE theory of visual attention: an integration of space-based and object-based attention. , 1996, Psychological review.

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

[19]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Dimension-based attention modulates feed-forward visual processing. , 2010, Acta psychologica.

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

[21]  Michael Zehetleitner,et al.  Top-down control of attention: it's gradual, practice-dependent, and hierarchically organized. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[23]  Z Li,et al.  Contextual influences in V1 as a basis for pop out and asymmetry in visual search. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[24]  Dragan Rangelov,et al.  The multiple-weighting-systems hypothesis: Theory and empirical support , 2012, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

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

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

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

[28]  A. Cohen,et al.  Intra- and cross-dimensional visual search for single-feature targets , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[29]  H. Pashler,et al.  Repetition priming in visual search: Episodic retrieval, not feature priming , 2004, Memory & cognition.

[30]  Stefanie I. Becker,et al.  The mechanism of priming: episodic retrieval or priming of pop-out? , 2008, Acta psychologica.

[31]  Clayton Hickey,et al.  Priming resolves perceptual ambiguity in visual search: Evidence from behaviour and electrophysiology , 2010, Vision Research.

[32]  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.

[33]  D. Hubel,et al.  Anatomy and physiology of a color system in the primate visual cortex , 1984, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

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

[35]  D. Hubel,et al.  Segregation of form, color, movement, and depth: anatomy, physiology, and perception. , 1988, Science.

[36]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Priming of popout: III. A short-term implicit memory system beneficial for rapid target selection , 2000 .

[37]  H. Müller,et al.  Stimulus Saliency Modulates Pre-Attentive Processing Speed in Human Visual Cortex , 2011, PloS one.

[38]  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.

[39]  Jonathan Westley Peirce,et al.  Neuroinformatics Original Research Article Generating Stimuli for Neuroscience Using Psychopy , 2022 .

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

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

[42]  David J. Field,et al.  Contour integration by the human visual system: Evidence for a local “association field” , 1993, Vision Research.

[43]  H. Müller,et al.  The detection of feature singletons defined in two dimensions is based on salience summation, rather than on serial exhaustive or interactive race architectures , 2009, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[44]  J. Theeuwes Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. , 2010, Acta psychologica.

[45]  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.

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

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

[48]  Dragan Rangelov,et al.  Partial repetition costs persist in nonsearch compound tasks: Evidence for multiple-weighting-systems hypothesis , 2012, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[49]  H. Deubel,et al.  Saccade target selection and object recognition: Evidence for a common attentional mechanism , 1996, Vision Research.

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

[51]  Dominique Lamy,et al.  A dual-stage account of inter-trial priming effects , 2010, Vision Research.

[52]  Jon Driver,et al.  Repetition streaks increase perceptual sensitivity in visual search of brief displays , 2008, Visual cognition.