Strategic Control of Attention to Objects and Locations

Rosen

Cutrone

et al. 2015

The attentional prioritization hypothesis of object-based attention (Shomstein & Yantis in Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 41–51, 2002) suggests a two-stage selection process comprising an automatic spatial gradient and flexible strategic (prioritization) selection. The combined attentional priorities of these two stages of object-based selection determine the order in which participants will search the display for the presence of a target. The strategic process has often been likened to a prioritized visual search. By modifying the double-rectangle cueing paradigm (Egly, Driver, & Rafal in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 161–177, 1994) and placing it in the context of a larger-scale visual search, we examined how the prioritization search is affected by search efficiency. By probing both targets located on the cued object and targets external to the cued object, we found that the attentional priority surrounding a selected object is strongly modulated by search mode. However, the ordering of the prioritization search is unaffected by search mode. The data also provide evidence that standard spatial visual search and object-based prioritization search may rely on distinct mechanisms. These results provide insight into the interactions between the mode of visual search and object-based selection, and help define the modulatory consequences of search efficiency for object-based attention.

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

The effects of visual search efficiency on object-based attention

Rosen

Cutrone

et al. 2015

“…We recommend that future studies carry out such manipulations within the same group of participants. Nonetheless, our findings suggest that the strength of target-object integration may affect the strategies that participants adopt to allocate object-based attention, consistent with previous proposals of strategic control of object-based attention (Drummond & Shomstein, 2010;Greenberg, 2009;Greenberg & Gmeindl, 2008).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Target–object integration, attention distribution, and object orientation interactively modulate object-based selection

Al-Janabi

2016

“…Thus, our findings favor a role of both prioritized locations and objects in saccade preparation. It is worth noting here that this is also consistent with well-accepted theories positing voluntary control over object-based attention (Greenberg & Gmeindl, 2008; Greenberg, 2009; Drummond & Shomstein, 2010; Shomstein, 2012). …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Saccade latency indexes exogenous and endogenous object-based attention

Şentürk

Liu

2016

Classic studies of object-based attention have utilized keypress responses as the main dependent measure. However, people typically make saccades to fixate important objects. Recent work has shown that attention may act differently when deployed covertly versus in advance of a saccade. We further investigated the link between saccades and attention by examining whether object-based effects can be observed for saccades. We adapted the classical double-rectangle cueing paradigm of Egly et al., (1994), and measured both the first saccade latency and keypress reaction time (RT) to a target that appeared at the end of one of the two rectangles. Our results showed that saccade latency exhibited higher sensitivity than RT in detecting effects of attention. We also assessed the generality of the attention effects by testing three types of cues: hybrid (predictive and peripheral), exogenous (non-predictive and peripheral), and endogenous (predictive and central). We found that both RT and saccade latency exhibited effects of both space-based and object-based attentional selection. However, saccade latency showed a more robust attentional modulation than RTs. For the exogenous cue, we observed a spatial inhibition-of-return along with an object-based effect, implying that object-based attention is independent of space-based attention. Overall, our results reveal an oculomotor correlate of object-based attention, suggesting that, in addition to spatial priority, object-level priority also affects saccade planning.