Attentional capture within and between objects

Mortier, Karen; Donk, Mieke; Theeuwes, Jan

doi:10.1016/s0001-6918(03)00024-6

Cited by 9 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More important, the difference between the invalidly cued same-object and invalidly cued different-object conditions was reliable [489 vs. 501 msec; t(11) 2.4, p .05], signifying the classic object-based attention effect. Note that this object-based attention effect of 12 msec is very comparable to the classic object-based effect reported in Egly et al (1994), as well as the object-based attention effects reported in other studies using similar displays (e.g., Hecht & Vecera, 2007;Mortier et al, 2003;Richard, Lee, & Vecera, 2008).…”

Section: Stimulisupporting

confidence: 86%

Object-based eye movements: The eyes prefer to stay within the same object

Theeuwes

Mathôt

Kingstone

2010

Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Stimulisupporting

confidence: 86%

Object-based eye movements: The eyes prefer to stay within the same object

Theeuwes

Mathôt

Kingstone

2010

Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…made up by two parallel lines). In addition, exogenous attention may spread within a visual object (Mortier, Donk, & Theeuwes, 2003) and may be modulated by the attentional control setting induced by the task (Folk et al, 1992). Thus, together with these findings, our results suggest that exogenous attention is highly plastic and adaptive, able to accommodate different visual stimulations and tasks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Object-centered representations support flexible exogenous visual attention across translation and reflection

Lin

2013

Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual attention can be deployed to stimuli based on our willful, top-down goal (endogenous attention) or on their intrinsic saliency against the background (exogenous attention). Flexibility is thought to be a hallmark of endogenous attention, whereas decades of research show that exogenous attention is attracted to the retinotopic locations of the salient stimuli. However, to the extent that salient stimuli in the natural environment usually form specific spatial relations with the surrounding context and are dynamic, exogenous attention, to be adaptive, should embrace these structural regularities. Here we test a non-retinotopic, object-centered mechanism in exogenous attention, in which exogenous attention is dynamically attracted to a relative, object-centered location. Using a moving frame configuration, we presented two frames in succession, forming either apparent translational motion or in mirror reflection, with a completely uninformative, transient cue presented at one of the item locations in the first frame. Despite that the cue is presented in a spatially separate frame, in both translation and mirror reflection, human performance in visual search is enhanced when the target in the second frame appears at the same relative location as the cue location than at other locations. These results provide unambiguous evidence for non-retinotopic exogenous attention and further reveal an object-centered mechanism supporting flexible exogenous attention. Moreover, attentional generalization across mirror reflection may constitute an attentional correlate of perceptual generalization across lateral mirror images, supporting an adaptive, functional account of mirror images confusion.

show abstract