Textures shape the attentional focus: Evidence from exogenous and endogenous cueing

The spatial cueing paradigm (Posner Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 32:3–25, 1980) has often been used to investigate the time course of the deployment of visual attention in space. In a series of eight experiments we investigated whether spatial cues would not only enhance processing of stimuli presented at cued locations, but also enhance processing of the entire texture in which the stimuli were presented. Results showed highest accuracy for responses to stimuli presented at cued locations, a replication of the traditional cueing effect (Posner 1980). Additionally, stimuli presented at uncued locations were responded to with higher accuracy when they were presented inside the same texture as the cued location, as compared with stimuli presented outside the texture with the cued location. To investigate this texture advantage for both automatic and voluntary attention deployment, exogenous and endogenous cues were used. The texture advantage was observed for short interstimulus intervals (ISIs) of 50 and 100 ms for exogenous cues and for a longer ISI of 200 ms for endogenous cues. These findings indicate that the arrangement of task-irrelevant visual stimuli also can have a large impact on the cueing effect. This suggests that visual spatial attention spreads texture-wise across the visual field. Control experiments revealed that the homogeneity within texture elements contributes most to the effect but that the texture advantage is a function of both orientation contrast at the texture border and homogeneity within texture elements.

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

[2]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Exogenous spatial cueing modulates subliminal masked priming. , 2007, Acta psychologica.

[3]  Judith Avrahami,et al.  Objects of attention, objects of perception , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

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

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

[6]  J. Lupiáñez,et al.  Please Scroll down for Article the Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Modulation of Spatial Stroop by Object-based Attention but Not by Space- Based Attention , 2022 .

[7]  B. Julesz,et al.  Short-range limitation on detection of feature differences. , 1987, Spatial vision.

[8]  A. D. Macquistan Object-based allocation of visual attention in response to exogenous, but not endogenous, spatial precues , 1997 .

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

[10]  F. Cadaveira,et al.  The time course of the effects of central and peripheral cues on visual processing: an event-related potentials study , 2004, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[11]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Sustained and transient components of focal visual attention , 1989, Vision Research.

[12]  L. Zhaoping,et al.  A theory of a saliency map in primary visual cortex (V1) tested by psychophysics of colour–orientation interference in texture segmentation , 2006 .

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

[14]  Ulrich W. Weger,et al.  Attending to objects: Endogenous cues can produce inhibition of return , 2008 .

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

[16]  M. Posner The Cognitive Neuroscience of Attention , 2020 .

[17]  J. Theeuwes Irrelevant Singletons Capture Attention , 2005 .

[18]  B. Milliken,et al.  Inhibition of return and the attentional set for integrating versus differentiating information. , 1999, The Journal of general psychology.

[19]  R. Rafal,et al.  Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[20]  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.

[21]  C. Koch,et al.  A saliency-based search mechanism for overt and covert shifts of visual attention , 2000, Vision Research.

[22]  M. Eimer Event-related brain potentials distinguish processing stages involved in face perception and recognition , 2000, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[23]  S. Tipper,et al.  On the Strategic Modulation of the Time Course of Facilitation and Inhibition of Return , 2001, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[24]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  The size of an attentional window modulates attentional capture by color singletons , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

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

[26]  S. Yantis,et al.  Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: voluntary versus automatic allocation. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[28]  L. M. Ward,et al.  Orienting of Attention , 2008 .

[29]  J. Lupiáñez,et al.  ERP evidence for selective drop in attentional costs in uncertain environments: Challenging a purely premotor account of covert orienting of attention , 2011, Neuropsychologia.

[30]  S A Hillyard,et al.  Spatial gradients of visual attention: behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. , 1988, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

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

[32]  Gerard Hoberg,et al.  On Flexibility , 2001 .

[33]  B. Julesz,et al.  Texton gradients: The texton theory revisited , 2004, Biological Cybernetics.

[34]  Zhaoping Li A saliency map in primary visual cortex , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[35]  J. Findlay,et al.  The effect of visual attention on peripheral discrimination thresholds in single and multiple element displays. , 1988, Acta psychologica.

[36]  Morris Goldsmith,et al.  Modulation of object-based attention by spatial focus under endogenous and exogenous orienting. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[37]  Kyle R Cave,et al.  Object-based attention with endogenous cuing and positional certainty , 2008, Perception & psychophysics.

[38]  M. Carrasco,et al.  On the flexibility of sustained attention and its effects on a texture segmentation task , 2008, Vision Research.

[39]  Zhaoping Li V1 mechanisms and some figure-ground and border effects. , 2003, Journal of physiology, Paris.

[40]  Michael D. Dodd,et al.  Allocating visual attention to grouped objects , 2005 .

[41]  Victor A. F. Lamme,et al.  Neural Mechanisms of Visual Awareness: A Linking Proposition , 2000 .

[42]  John K. Tsotsos,et al.  Neurobiology of Attention , 2005 .

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

[44]  J. Lauwereyns,et al.  Exogenous/Endogenous Control of Space-based/ Object-based Attention: Four Types of Visual Selection? , 1998 .

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

[46]  J. Lupiáñez,et al.  The modulation of spatial congruency by object-based attention: Analysing the “locus” of the modulation , 2011, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology.

[47]  R. Klein On the Control of Visual Orienting , 2004 .

[48]  Sean T. Stevens,et al.  Comparing the time course and efficacy of spatial and feature-based attention , 2007, Vision Research.

[49]  Richard D Wright,et al.  Location cue validity affects inhibition of return of visual processing , 2000, Vision Research.

[50]  Juan Lupiáñez,et al.  The role of spatial attention and other processes on the magnitude and time course of cueing effects , 2005, Cognitive Processing.

[51]  M Eimer,et al.  Attending to quadrants and ring-shaped regions: ERP effects of visual attention in different spatial selection tasks. , 1999, Psychophysiology.

[52]  J. Duncan Selective attention and the organization of visual information. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

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

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

[55]  J. Lupiáñez,et al.  Does IOR occur in discrimination tasks? Yes, it does, but later , 1997, Perception & psychophysics.

[56]  Matthias M. Müller,et al.  Can the Spotlight of Attention Be Shaped Like a Doughnut? Evidence From Steady-State Visual Evoked Potentials , 2002 .

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

[58]  E. Macaluso,et al.  Neural correlates of the spatial and expectancy components of endogenous and stimulus-driven orienting of attention in the Posner task. , 2010, Cerebral cortex.

[59]  M. Behrmann,et al.  The Space of an Object: Object Attention Alters the Spatial Gradient in the Surround by Virtue of the Object's Presence, Spatial Regions of the Visual , 2022 .

[60]  Agnieszka Wykowska,et al.  Detecting pop-out targets in contexts of varying homogeneity: Investigating homogeneity coding with event-related brain potentials (ERPs) , 2007, Brain Research.

[61]  Ohad Ben-Shahar,et al.  Attention, segregation, and textons: Bridging the gap between object-based attention and texton-based segregation , 2007, Vision Research.

[62]  J. Lupiáñez,et al.  A review of attentional capture: On its automaticity and sensitivity to endogenous control. , 2002 .

[63]  M. Cheal,et al.  Central and Peripheral Precuing of Forced-Choice Discrimination , 1991, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[64]  Brian J. Scholl,et al.  The role of closure in defining the “objects” of object-based attention , 2005 .

[65]  Mieke Donk,et al.  Detection Performance in Pop-Out Tasks: Nonmonotonic Changes with Display Size and Eccentricity , 2002, Perception.

[66]  Li Jingling,et al.  Change Detection is Easier at Texture Border Bars When They are Parallel to the Border: Evidence for V1 Mechanisms of Bottom-up Salience , 2008, Perception.

[67]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  fMRI evidence for objects as the units of attentional selection , 1999, Nature.

[68]  C. Folk,et al.  Spatial cuing in a stereoscopic display: Evidence for a “depth-blind” attentional spotlight , 1996, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

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