Objects on a Collision Path With the Observer Demand Attention

Lin, Jeffrey; Franconeri, Steven; Enns, James T.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02143.x

Cited by 61 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is in agreement with previous findings in which it was suggested that gaze, and thereby overt attention, is directed to the object that demands the more behaviorally urgent response (Lin, Franconeri & Enns 2008). Moreover, it is also consistent with the suggestion that gaze during an occlusion, and therefore overt attention, tends to follow the forward motion of the object (e.g., representational momentum) and rarely switches to a location behind and opposing motion (Lovejoy et al 2009).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Temporal estimation with two moving objects: overt and covert pursuit

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study examined temporal estimation in a prediction motion task where participants were cued to overtly pursue one of two moving objects, which could either arrive first (i.e., shortest TTC) or second (i.e., longest TTC) after a period of occlusion. Participants were instructed to estimate TTC of the first-arriving object only, thus making it necessary to overtly pursue the cued object while at the same time covertly pursuing the other (non-cued) object. A control (baseline) condition was also included in which participants had to estimate TTC of a single, overtly pursued object. Results showed that participants were able to estimate the arrival order of the two objects with very high accuracy irrespective of whether they had overtly or covertly pursued the first-arriving object. However, compared to the single-object baseline, participants' temporal estimation of the covert object was impaired when it arrived 500 ms before the overtly pursued object. In terms of eye movements, participants exhibited significantly more switches in gaze location during occlusion from the cued to the non-cued object but only when the latter arrived first. Still, comparison of trials with and without a switch in gaze location when the non-cued object arrived first indicated no advantage for temporal estimation. Taken together, our results indicate that overt pursuit is sufficient but not necessary for accurate temporal estimation. Covert pursuit can enable representation of a moving object's trajectory and thereby accurate temporal estimation providing the object moves close to the overt attentional focus.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Temporal estimation with two moving objects: overt and covert pursuit

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As well as explaining the RT effects that have previously been attributed to spatial attention (e.g., , 2005a, b, 2006Franconeri & Simons 2003Lin et al, 2008;Schmuckler et al, 2007;van der Weel & van der Meer, 2009;Takeuchi, 1997;von Mühlenen & Lleras, 2007), the motor priming account may also explain findings from brain imaging studies on how motion in depth is processed. Billington, Wilkie, Field, and Wann (2010) used fMRI to record BOLD activity as participants viewed an illusory ball that simulated forward or backward motion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…A wealth of evidence now indicates that humans are highly sensitive to looming motion (e.g., Lin et al, 2008;Takeuchi, 1997;Schmuckler et al, 2007;van der Weel & van der Meer, 2009). Much of this evidence concerns looming motion that is already attended; the wider issue of whether attention is preferentially attracted to looming motion is more contentious , 2005a, b, 2006Franconeri & Simons 2003Skarratt et al, 2009;von Mühlenen & Lleras, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, Cole and Liversedge (2006) found that expanding objects were less susceptible to change blindness than were contracting objects. Furthermore, Lin, Franconeri, and Enns (2008) found that participants identified objects more rapidly when they moved on a collision path than on a near-miss trajectory. An analogous finding has been reported in 4-5-month-old infants, in which collision-bound objects elicited a larger number of blink responses than did their near-miss counterparts (Schmuckler, Collimore, & Dannemiller, 2007).…”

Section: General Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Looming motion primes the visuomotor system.

Skarratt¹,

Gellatly²,

Cole³

et al. 2014

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A wealth of evidence now shows that human and animal observers display greater sensitivity to objects that move toward them than to objects that remain static or move away. Increased sensitivity in humans is often evidenced by reaction times that increase in rank order from looming, to receding, to static targets. However, it is not clear whether the processing advantage enjoyed by looming motion is mediated by the attention system or the motor system. The present study investigated this by first examining whether sensitivity is to looming motion per se or to certain monocular or binocular cues that constitute stereoscopic motion in depth. None of the cues accounted for the looming advantage. A perceptual measure was then used to examine performance with minimal involvement of the motor system. Results showed that looming and receding motion were equivalent in attracting attention, suggesting that the looming advantage is indeed mediated by the motor system. These findings suggest that although motion itself is sufficient for attentional capture, motion direction can prime motor responses.

show abstract

“…For example, it has been found that object motion induces a search cost for invalid spatial cues when searching for a moving target (Folk et al, 1994). Additionally, looming motion associated with a target engenders faster RTs, but looming motion associated with a distractor object engenders slower RTs across differing set sizes (Lin, Franconeri, & Enns, 2008). Researchers also have demonstrated that capture does not necessarily occur uniformly for all motion (Franconeri & Simons, 2003;Lin et al, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Fixation Not Required: Characterizing Oculomotor Attention Capture for Looming Stimuli

Lewis

Neider

2015

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A stimulus moving toward us, such as a ball being thrown in our direction or a vehicle braking suddenly in front of ours, often represents a stimulus that requires a rapid response. Using a visual search task in which target and distractor items were systematically associated with a looming object, we explored whether this sort of looming motion captures attention, the nature of such capture using eye movement measures (overt/covert), and the extent to which such capture effects are more closely tied to motion onset or the motion itself. We replicated previous findings indicating that looming motion induces response time benefits and costs during visual search Lin, Franconeri, & Enns(Psychological Science 19(7): 686-693, 2008). These differences in response times were independent of fixation, indicating that these capture effects did not necessitate overt attentional shifts to a looming object for search benefits or costs to occur. Interestingly, we found no differences in capture benefits and costs associated with differences in looming motion type. Combined, our results suggest that capture effects associated with looming motion are more likely subserved by covert attentional mechanisms rather than overt mechanisms, and attention capture for looming motion is likely related to motion itself rather than the onset of motion.

show abstract

Objects on a Collision Path With the Observer Demand Attention

Cited by 61 publications

References 16 publications

Temporal estimation with two moving objects: overt and covert pursuit

Temporal estimation with two moving objects: overt and covert pursuit

Looming motion primes the visuomotor system.

Fixation Not Required: Characterizing Oculomotor Attention Capture for Looming Stimuli

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About