In studies of visual attention, and related aspects of cognition, race (continent/s of ancestry) of participants is typically not reported, implying that authors consider this variable irrelevant to outcomes. However, there exist several findings of perceptual differences between East Asians and Caucasian Westerners that can be interpreted as relative differences in global versus local distribution of attention. Here, we used Navon figures (e.g., large E made up of small Vs) to provide the first direct comparison of global-local processing using a standard method from the attention literature. Relative to Caucasians, East Asians showed a strong global advantage. Further, this extended to the second generation (Asian-Australians), although weakened compared to recent immigrants. Our results argue participants' race should be reported in all studies about, or involving, visual attention to spatially distributed stimuli: to continue to ignore race risks adding noise to data and/or drawing invalid theoretical conclusions by mixing functionally distinct populations.

Holistic coding for faces is shown in several illusions that demonstrate integration of the percept across the entire face. The illusions occur upright but, crucially, not inverted. Converting the illusions into experimental tasks that measure their strength – and thus index degree of holistic coding – is often considered straightforward yet in fact relies on a hidden assumption, namely that there is no contribution to the experimental measure from secondary cognitive factors. For the composite effect, a relevant secondary factor is size of the “spotlight” of visuospatial attention. The composite task assumes this spotlight can be easily restricted to the target half (e.g., top-half) of the compound face stimulus. Yet, if this assumption were not true then a large spotlight, in the absence of holistic perception, could produce a false composite effect, present even for inverted faces and contributing partially to the score for upright faces. We review evidence that various factors can influence spotlight size: race/culture (Asians often prefer a more global distribution of attention than Caucasians); sex (females can be more global); appearance of the join or gap between face halves; and location of the eyes, which typically attract attention. Results from five experiments then show inverted faces can sometimes produce large false composite effects, and imply that whether this happens or not depends on complex interactions between causal factors. We also report, for both identity and expression, that only top-half face targets (containing eyes) produce valid composite measures. A sixth experiment demonstrates an example of a false inverted part-whole effect, where encoding-specificity is the secondary cognitive factor. We conclude the inverted face control should be tested in all composite and part-whole studies, and an effect for upright faces should be interpreted as a pure measure of holistic processing only when the experimental design produces no effect inverted.

A correlation between myopia and visuo-spatial attention is reported. More severe myopia was found to be associated with better ability to quickly narrow the focus of visual attention to a small region of space (assessed via interference from spatial proximity of to-be-ignored inverted half-faces), in a task where local focus was explicitly required. There was no myopia association with size of the default attentional window, when the need to respond to either small local or larger global regions was equally likely (in a particular Navon figure task). Results suggest that myopics might allocate attention more narrowly than individuals with normal eyesight in certain functionally important visual tasks (eg reading) but not others (eg driving).

No abstract