Onset of background dynamic noise attenuates preview benefit in inefficient visual search

Osugi, Takayuki; Murakami, Ikuya

doi:10.1016/j.visres.2015.02.024

Cited by 11 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 44 publications

(74 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The interpretation of the data above is consistent with a SDT/BO model that assigns negative and positive weights at old and new locations respectively (Allen & Humphreys, 2007;Osugi & Murakami, 2015;Shimozaki et al, 2012).…”

Section: Jiang and Wang (2004) Interpreted A Similar Dependency As Evsupporting

confidence: 75%

“…ranging from around five to 20 objects (e.g., Jiang et al, 2002;Osugi et al, 2015;Watson & Kunar, 2012). Assuming inhibition and capture represent separate resources, this asymmetry would have driven differences in the magnitude of the preview benefit at set sizes four and eight in the Gap condition, because the proportionate decrease in capture at the larger set size would have had less impact on inhibition at old locations.…”

Section: Jiang and Wang (2004) Interpreted A Similar Dependency As Evmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Visuospatial working memory mediates inhibitory and facilitatory guidance in preview search.

Barrett¹,

Shimozaki²,

Jensen³

et al. 2016

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual search is faster and more accurate when a subset of distractors is presented before the display containing the target. This "preview benefit" has been attributed to separate inhibitory and facilitatory guidance mechanisms during search. In the preview task the temporal cues thought to elicit inhibition and facilitation provide complementary sources of information about the likely location of the target. In this study, we use a Bayesian Observer model to compare sensitivity when the temporal cues eliciting inhibition and facilitation produce complementary, and competing, sources of information. Observers searched for T-shaped targets among L-shaped distractors in two standard and two preview conditions. In the standard conditions, all the objects in the display appeared at the same time. In the preview conditions, the initial subset of distractors either stayed on the screen or disappeared before the onset of the search display, which contained the target when present. In the latter, the synchronous onset of old and new objects negates the predictive utility of stimulus-driven capture during search. The results indicate observers combine memory-driven inhibition and sensory-driven capture to reduce spatial uncertainty about the target's likely location during search. In the absence of spatially predictive onsets, memorydriven inhibition at old locations persists despite irrelevant sensory change at previewed locations. This result is consistent with a bias towards unattended objects during search via the active suppression of irrelevant capture at previously attended locations.

show abstract

Section: Jiang and Wang (2004) Interpreted A Similar Dependency As Evsupporting

confidence: 75%

Section: Jiang and Wang (2004) Interpreted A Similar Dependency As Evmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visuospatial working memory mediates inhibitory and facilitatory guidance in preview search.

Barrett¹,

Shimozaki²,

Jensen³

et al. 2016

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies have demonstrated that the preview benefit is degraded when the shapes of old items are changed at the onset of new items (Watson and Humphreys, 1997, 2002) or when the background is changed from static random noise to dynamic random noise (Osugi and Murakami, 2015), suggesting that attentional capture to an abrupt event in the scene is a crucial factor to control the efficiency of the preview benefit. However, it remained unclear whether attentional capture is really involved or whether stimulus change itself is sufficient.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the preview benefit is degraded when observers have to perform a secondary task during the preview period, suggesting that visual marking involves an active attentional process to mark the locations of the old items while they are being previewed (Watson and Humphreys, 1997; Humphreys et al, 2002; Olivers and Humphreys, 2002). Second, visual marking is automatically disrupted if attention is captured by changes in the old items (Watson and Humphreys, 1997, 2002) or changes in a background region (Osugi and Murakami, 2015) that occur simultaneously with the onset of new items. This happens even when the luminance of the old items is maintained as their shapes are abruptly changed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attentional Capture to a Singleton Distractor Degrades Visual Marking in Visual Search

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual search is easier after observing some distractors in advance; it is as if the previewed distractors were excluded from the search. This effect is referred to as the preview benefit, and a memory template that visually marks the old locations of the distractors is thought to help in prioritizing the locations of newly presented items. One remaining question is whether the presence of a conspicuous item during the sequential shift of attention within the new items reduces this preview benefit. To address this issue, we combined the above preview search and a conventional visual search paradigm using a singleton distractor and examined whether the search performance was affected by the presence of the singleton. The results showed that the slope of reaction time as a function of set size became steeper in the presence of a singleton, indicating that the singleton distractor reduced the preview benefit. Furthermore, this degradation effect was positively correlated with the degree of conventional attentional capture to a singleton measured in a separate experiment with simultaneous search. These findings suggest that the mechanism of visual marking shares common attentional resources with the search process.

show abstract

“…A recent study reexamined this background-independent view by employing static and dynamic random-noise displays and manipulating a combination of background noises presented in addition to the preview and search displays (Osugi and Murakami, 2015). When the background noise was continually displaced throughout each trial or when it changed from dynamic to static noise at the onset of the search display, the preview benefit remained; in contrast, when the background was changed from static to dynamic noise at the onset of the search display, this task-irrelevant background event abolished the preview benefit.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Drastic Change in Background Luminance or Motion Degrades the Preview Benefit

Osugi

Murakami

2017

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When some distractors (old items) precede some others (new items) in an inefficient visual search task, the search is restricted to new items, and yields a phenomenon termed the preview benefit. It has recently been demonstrated that, in this preview search task, the onset of repetitive changes in the background disrupts the preview benefit, whereas a single transient change in the background does not. In the present study, we explored this effect with dynamic background changes occurring in the context of realistic scenes, to examine the robustness and usefulness of visual marking. We examined whether preview benefit in a preview search task survived through task-irrelevant changes in the scene, namely a luminance change and the initiation of coherent motion, both occurring in the background. Luminance change of the background disrupted preview benefit if it was synchronized with the onset of the search display. Furthermore, although the presence of coherent background motion per se did not affect preview benefit, its synchronized initiation with the onset of the search display did disrupt preview benefit if the motion speed was sufficiently high. These results suggest that visual marking can be destroyed by a transient event in the scene if that event is sufficiently drastic.

show abstract

Onset of background dynamic noise attenuates preview benefit in inefficient visual search

Cited by 11 publications

References 44 publications

Visuospatial working memory mediates inhibitory and facilitatory guidance in preview search.

Visuospatial working memory mediates inhibitory and facilitatory guidance in preview search.

Attentional Capture to a Singleton Distractor Degrades Visual Marking in Visual Search

A Drastic Change in Background Luminance or Motion Degrades the Preview Benefit

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About