Measuring Attention Using Induced Motion

Abstract

Attention was measured by means of its effect upon induced motion. Perceived horizontal motion was induced in a vertically moving test spot by the physical horizontal motion of inducing objects. All stimuli were in a frontoparallel plane. The induced motion vectored with the physical motion to produce a clockwise or counterclockwise tilt in the apparent path of motion of the test spot. Either a single inducing object or two inducing objects moving in opposite directions were used. Twelve observers were instructed to attend to or to ignore the single inducing object while fixating the test object and, when the two opposing inducing objects were present, to attend to one inducing object while ignoring the other. Tracking of the test spot was visually monitored. The tilt of the path of apparent motion of the test spot was measured by tactile adjustment of a comparison rod. It was found that the measured tilt was substantially larger when the single inducing object was attended rather than ignored. For the two inducing objects, attending to one while ignoring the other clearly increased the effectiveness of the attended inducing object. The results are analyzed in terms of the distinction between voluntary and involuntary attention. The advantages of measuring attention by its effect on induced motion as compared with the use of a precueing procedure, and a hypothesis regarding the role of attention in modifying perceived spatial characteristics are discussed.

Induced motion of a fixated target: Influence of voluntary eye deviation

“…serve as a unifying explanation for other cases that seem at first to defy these categories. For example, the direction and magnitude of 1M is influenced by attention to competing inducing stimuli (Gogel & MacCracken, 1979;Gogel & Sharkey, 1989;Gogel & Tietz, 1976). This is consistent with enhancement of OKN gain by attention directed at a moving display (Barnes & Hill, 1984;Cheng & Outerbridge, 1975;Dubois & Collewijn, 1979;HolmJensen, 1984).…”

A theory of phenomenal geometry and its applications

“…The other is capable of producing size and shape constancy or, more generally, is consistent with the requirements of the size-distance and shape-slant invariance hypotheses (Boring, 1946;Epstein & Babler, 1989;Epstein & Broota, 1986;Epstein & Lovitts, 1985;Holway & Boring, 1941;Mack, 1978;Rock, 1977Rock, , 1983. In terms of the theory presented in this paper, a seeming regression toward the proximal stimulus and, thus, toward independence from perceived distance as cue effectiveness is lessened either by cue reduction or by withdrawal of attention is misleading (Gogel & DaSilva, 1987b;Gogel & Sharkey, 1989). Instead of indicating independence from perceived distance, such results indicate only that the stimuli are perceived as displaced toward a constant perceived distance defined by the specific distance tendency and/or the equidistance tendency.…”

Differential use of distance and location information for spatial localization

“…If the subjects were attending to different features of the stimulus in the different conditions, then the results may merely reflect differences in people's abilities to encode particular features of a visual stimulus, and not necessarily differences in the type of information available for localization. There is ample evidence that attentional factors can affect visual illusions, and it is important to determine whether such factors contributed to the present findings (Coren & Porac, 1983;Gogel & Sharkey, 1988;Kelso, Cook, Olson, & Epstein, 1975;Tsal, 1984).…”