Attention capacity and task difficulty in visual search

Huang, Liqiang; Pashler, Harold

doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2004.06.006

Cited by 98 publications

(119 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

113

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, and perhaps more surprising, the L decoys produced stronger localized attentional interference with O targets than did the C decoys. Both of these findings might be attributable to the type of perceptual processing necessary to distinguish a T from an L and an O from a C. As others have noted, the T-L discrimination involves distinguishing the relative spatial locations of a common set of features (Huang & Pashler, 2005;Wolfe, 1998), whereas the O-C discrimination involves identifying the presence or absence of a feature (e.g., a gap or closure; Treisman & Souther, 1985). The data suggest that the spatial arrangement discrimination involved in distinguishing a T from an L may be more resource intensive (Huang & Pashler, 2005) than is the feature detection task required to discriminate an O from a C. This may leave the O-shaped targets less susceptible to localized attentional interference than are the T-shaped target stimuli.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Attentional templates regulate competitive interactions among attended visual objects

Mounts

McCarley

Terech

2007

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Attentional templates regulate competitive interactions among attended visual objects

Mounts

McCarley

Terech

2007

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Moreover, several studies have indicated that capacity limitations do not depend on difficulty. Huang and Pashler (2005), for example, demonstrated a dissociation between difficulty and capacity using the simultaneous-sequential paradigm. They found that out of three difficult visual search tasks (feature, spatial conjunction, and feature conjunction), one showed evidence of being limited capacity (spatial conjunction), and the other two did not.…”

Section: Task Difficultymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such models have been successful in predicting performance for tasks that rely on the perception of simple visual features, such as luminance, orientation, and size (see, e.g., Bonnel, Stein, & Bertucci, 1992;Davis, Shikano, Peterson, & Michel, 2003;Palmer, Verghese, & Pavel, 2000;Scharff, Palmer, & Moore, 2011). Simple-feature tasks can be made difficult and slow by adjusting such stimulus parameters as target-distractor similarity, but still they have unlimited capacity (Huang & Pashler, 2005).…”

Section: Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence of fixed capacity in visual object categorization

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How is visual object perception limited by divided attention? Whereas some theories have proposed that it is not limited at all (unlimited capacity), others have proposed that divided attention introduces restrictive capacity limitations or serial processing (fixed capacity). We addressed this question using a task in which observers searched for instances of particular object categories, such as a moose or squirrel. We applied an extended simultaneous-sequential paradigm to test the fixed-capacity and unlimited-capacity models (Experiment 1). The results were consistent with fixed capacity and rejected unlimited capacity. We ascertained that these results were due to attention, and not to sensory interactions such as crowding, by repeating the experiment using a cuing paradigm with physically identical displays (Experiment 2). The results from both experiments were consistent with theories of object perception that have fixed capacity, and they rejected theories with unlimited capacity. Both serial and parallel models with fixed capacity remain viable alternatives.Keywords Visual search . Divided attention . Object recognition . Capacity limitations . Simultaneous-sequential paradigm Visual perception allows us to categorize objects, distinguishing a house from a train or a person from a dog. In navigating cluttered real-world environments, we are presented with multiple objects of interest simultaneously. In this article, we will examine how such divided attention affects our ability to categorize objects. CapacityThe effect of divided attention can be characterized in terms of capacity. Following Broadbent (1958), capacity refers to the quantity of information that can pass through a system during a given time interval. The two extreme, boundary-defining models are unlimited-capacity and fixed-capacity models.In unlimited-capacity models, divided attention does not limit information processing. In this case, performance is limited only by the quality of the sensory data. Importantly, unlimited-capacity processing is not necessarily fast or accurate: The definitive property is that the speed and accuracy of individual stimulus processes are not degraded by divided attention. The prototype of this class of model is the standard parallel model (Gardner, 1973;Townsend, 1974), in which multiple stimuli are analyzed in parallel and the processing rate for each object is independent of the number of objects being analyzed. Such models have been successful in predicting performance for tasks that rely on the perception of simple visual features, such as luminance, orientation, and size (see, e.g

show abstract

“…Visual search tasks have become one of the most widely used tool in the study of selective attention (Huang & Pashler, 2005). They involve presenting a target, hidden amongst non-target elements, and asking the participant to locate the target.…”

Section: Visual Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selective Attention and Perceptual Load in Autism Spectrum Disorder

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This thesis examines selective attention in young adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Existing literature regarding this issue is mixed; some research suggesting an overly-focused attentional style (Rincover & Ducharme, 1987) while others highlight an abnormally broad attentional lens (Burack, 1994).The research presented here has, for the first time, examined selective attention in individuals with ASD using a theoretically-led approach based on Lavie's Load Theory of attention and cognitive control (Lavie et al., 2004). Load theory states that the perceptual load (amount of potentially task relevant information) of a task affects selective attention. This theory may explain the equivocal findings in the current data on selective attention and ASD.Using behavioural measures, the pattern of selective attention under various levels of load was explored in individuals with ASD and matched controls. The results provide evidence of increased perceptual capacity in ASD. This means that, at any one time, individuals with ASD may be able to process more information from the visual environment. This increase in capacity was evident on tasks of both unconscious and conscious perception.In light of the social deficits observed in the condition, the work in this thesis also explored selective attention in the presence of social distractor stimuli. Results indicated that faces are less salient for individuals with ASD and, unlike for typical adults, are not processed in an automatic and mandatory fashion. These results bring together findings on selective attention with work on social processing in an attempt to find basic abnormalities which might be fundamental in explaining the disorder. 4For Guy 5

show abstract

Attention capacity and task difficulty in visual search

Cited by 98 publications

References 23 publications

Attentional templates regulate competitive interactions among attended visual objects

Attentional templates regulate competitive interactions among attended visual objects

Evidence of fixed capacity in visual object categorization

Selective Attention and Perceptual Load in Autism Spectrum Disorder

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About