Object-Based Attention on Social Units: Visual Selection of Hands Performing a Social Interaction

Abstract

Traditionally, objects of attention are characterized either as full-fledged entities or either as elements grouped by Gestalt principles. Because humans appear to use social groups as units to explain social activities, we proposed that a socially defined group, according to social interaction information, would also be a possible object of attentional selection. This hypothesis was examined using displays with and without handshaking interactions. Results demonstrated that object-based attention, which was measured by an object-specific attentional advantage (i.e., shorter response times to targets on a single object), was extended to two hands performing a handshake but not to hands that did not perform meaningful social interactions, even when they did perform handshake-like actions. This finding cannot be attributed to the familiarity of the frequent co-occurrence of two handshaking hands. Hence, object-based attention can select a grouped object whose parts are connected within a meaningful social interaction. This finding implies that object-based attention is constrained by top-down information.

The spatial distance compression effect is due to social interaction and not mere configuration

“…We argue that social interaction promotes the organization of information in a gestalt-like way, which causes the two individuals to be represented as a unit, thus inducing compression of the spatial distance representation. In support of this view, there is accumulating evidence that social-interaction cues between dyads can lead to the creation of unified perceptual events (Yin et al, 2018) as well as a single representation in working memory (Ding et al, 2017). It is also supported by fMRI studies that show representations of human social interactions have neural correlates (Abassi & Papeo, 2020;Isik et al, 2017).…”

Tracking multiple perspectives: Spontaneous computation of what individuals in high entitative groups see

“…With regard to individuals in a crowd, the efficiency of processing has been largely suggested to be dependent upon the group entitativity formed by them, that is, the degree to which a crowd of individuals is perceived as a unified group (Crawford, Sherman, & Hamilton, 2002;Ding, Gao, & Shen, 2017;Hamilton & Sherman, 1996;Yin, Ding, Zhou, Shui, Li, & Shen, 2013;Yin, Xu, Duan, & Shen, 2018). For example, the transference of traits from one group member to other group members was stronger in high-entitative groups than in low-entitative groups (Crawford et al, 2002).…”

“…For example, the transference of traits from one group member to other group members was stronger in high-entitative groups than in low-entitative groups (Crawford et al, 2002). Importantly, even when one of the members in a group was asked to be selected, the other was automatically selected as well (Yin et al, 2018), that is, binding individuals into groups leads to faster processing and enhanced memory of interacting partners (Ding et al, 2017;Vestner, Tipper, Hartley, Over, & Rueschemeyer, 2019). Hence, the efficiency of processing individuals' features can be enhanced when these individuals are treated as an actual group, which is a process similar to perceptual grouping (Vestner et al, 2019;Yin et al, 2018).…”

Violence reduces attention to faces and draws attention to points of contact

“…Still, some insightful work has been done on these areas, showing, for example, that objects can be important attractors of attention in natural scenes 27 . Moreover, specific kinematic features of hands are used to predict actor intentions 28 and meaningful social interactions, such as a handshake, have been shown to attract and constrain attention in the same way that objects do 29 . Therefore, in addition to faces, we also measured gaze fixation to points of contact and objects people were holding.…”