Change Detection in Complex Scenes: Hemispheric Contribution and the Role of Perceptual and Semantic Factors

Spotorno, Sara; Faure, Sylvane

doi:10.1068/p6524

Cited by 21 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 95 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…First, they indicate that previous controversial evidence about an inconsistency advantage for selection prioritisation during viewing (e.g., Bonitz & Gordon, 2008;Brockmole & Henderson, 2008;Cornelissen & Võ, 2017;Hollingworth & Henderson, 2003;Loftus & Mackworth, 1978;Stirk & Underwood, 2007;Underwood et al, 2007Underwood et al, , 2008 may have arisen from a bias in informativeness per se, due to comparisons with poorly informative objects. Second, they corroborate previous research, carried out in the change detection domain, which considered consistent/diagnostic and consistent/low informative objects and showed that informativeness in terms of diagnosticity for scene leads to preferential selection Pringle et al, 2001;Rensink et al, 1997Rensink et al, , 2000Spotorno & Faure, 2011). We reinforce this earlier claim by demonstrating that diagnosticity prioritisation holds true even when removing the imbalance in informativeness between the compared objects.…”

Section: Semantic and Perceptual Prioritisation In Scene Processingsupporting

confidence: 90%

The elephant in the room: Inconsistency in scene viewing and representation.

Spotorno

Tatler

2017

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined the extent to which semantic informativeness, consistency with expectations and perceptual salience contribute to object prioritisation in scene viewing and representation. In scene viewing (Experiments 1-2), semantic guidance overshadowed perceptual guidance in determining fixation order, with the greatest prioritisation for objects that were diagnostic of the scene's depicted event. Perceptual properties affected selection of consistent objects (regardless of their informativeness) but not of inconsistent objects. Semantic and perceptual properties also interacted in influencing foveal inspection, as inconsistent objects were fixated longer than low but not high salience diagnostic objects. While not studied in direct competition with each other (each studied in competition with diagnostic objects), we found that inconsistent objects were fixated earlier and for longer than consistent but marginally informative objects. In change detection (Experiment 3), perceptual guidance overshadowed semantic guidance, promoting detection of highly salient changes. A residual advantage for diagnosticity over inconsistency emerged only when selection prioritisation could not be based on low-level features. Overall these findings show that semantic inconsistency is not prioritised within a scene when competing with other relevant information that is essential to scene understanding and respects observers' expectations. Moreover, they reveal that the relative dominance of semantic or perceptual properties during selection depends on ongoing task requirements. Keywords:Semantic Consistency, Perceptual Salience, Scene Viewing, Change Detection, Eye Movements THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM 3 Public significance statement There has been long-standing debate about whether we look sooner at objects that are unexpected for the scene (i.e., semantically inconsistent objects). The present study shows that they are not prioritised over the most expected and informative objects for the event depicted in the scene (i.e., diagnostic objects), especially when these objects also stand out visually from their surroundings. Unexpected objects are looked at later, and when they are perceptually salient they slow down how quickly we select the most expected and informative objects in the scene.This study also shows that the impacts of object perceptual salience and object-scene semantic associations are task-dependent: semantics appear the most important source of guidance when viewers explore the scene for memorisation, whereas perceptual salience has a greater impact when changes have to be found. These findings provide new key insights into the roles of highand low-level factors in how we view and remember scenes. THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM 4The Elephant in the Room: Inconsistency in Scene Viewing and Representation Information selection during both online processing and memory representation is one of our fundamental and most striking abilities. Fundamental, because selection of a few, key aspects enables us to adapt and act fle...

show abstract

Section: Semantic and Perceptual Prioritisation In Scene Processingsupporting

confidence: 90%

The elephant in the room: Inconsistency in scene viewing and representation.

Spotorno

Tatler

2017

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This was observed in our data. In agreement with this view, changes are detected faster in the left hemifield in the change-blindness paradigm (Lyilikci, Becker, Güntürkün & Amado, 2010;Spotorno & Faure, 2011). This has been shown in detection experiments in which scenes were flickered and has not yet been investigated in saccade-contingent paradigms.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 75%

Spatial biases in viewing behavior

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Viewing behavior exhibits temporal and spatial structure that is independent of stimulus content and task goals. One example of such structure is horizontal biases, which are likely rooted in left-right asymmetries of the visual and attentional systems. Here, we studied the existence, extent, and mechanisms of this bias. Left- and right-handed subjects explored scenes from different image categories, presented in original and mirrored versions. We also varied the spatial spectral content of the images and the timing of stimulus onset. We found a marked leftward bias at the start of exploration that was independent of image category. This left bias was followed by a weak bias to the right that persisted for several seconds. This asymmetry was found in the majority of right-handers but not in left-handers. Neither low- nor high-pass filtering of the stimuli influenced the bias. This argues against mechanisms related to the hemispheric segregation of global versus local visual processing. Introducing a delay in stimulus onset after offset of a central fixation spot also had no influence. The bias was present even when stimuli were presented continuously and without any requirement to fixate, associated to both fixation- and saccade-contingent image changes. This suggests the bias is not caused by structural asymmetries in fixation control. Instead the pervasive horizontal bias is compatible with known asymmetries of higher-level attentional areas related to the detection of novel events.

show abstract

“…On the behavioral level, our findings are in line with a right-hemispheric specialization for the maintenance of spatial information, and a left-hemispheric specialization for the maintenance of verbal information (Machizawa et al, 2012;Reuter-Lorenz et al, 2000;Smith & Jonides, 1998;Spotorno & Faure, 2011;Thomason et al, 2008). In the spatial task, performance was higher for stimuli presented in the left hemifield, whereas in the verbal task performance was higher for stimuli presented to the right hemifield.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Age Differences in Hemispheric Lateralization in Spatial and Verbal Visual Working Memory

Sander

Maier

Napiórkowski

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to hemispheric specialization of the human brain, neural signatures of visual working memory (WM) performance are expected to differ between tasks involving verbal versus spatial memoranda. Theories of cognitive aging suggest a reduction of hemispheric specialization in older adults. Using behavioral and neural WM capacity markers, we assessed hemispheric lateralization in younger and older adults performing a spatial or verbal visual WM task.Participants encoded information presented in the left or right hemifield. We observed behavioral advantages for spatial stimuli processed in the right hemisphere and for verbal stimuli processed in the left hemisphere. While younger adults showed lateralization in both tasks, older adults showed lateralization only in the verbal task. Lateralization was assessed by the contralateral delay activity (CDA) on the neural level. CDA amplitudes displayed hemispheric lateralization for verbal versus spatial material, but this effect was age-invariant.While our findings support right-hemispheric specialization for spatial information maintenance, and left-hemispheric specialization for verbal information maintenance, we could not confirm a generalized reduction in hemispheric lateralization at older ages.Word count: 170

show abstract

Change Detection in Complex Scenes: Hemispheric Contribution and the Role of Perceptual and Semantic Factors

Cited by 21 publications

References 95 publications

The elephant in the room: Inconsistency in scene viewing and representation.

The elephant in the room: Inconsistency in scene viewing and representation.

Spatial biases in viewing behavior

Age Differences in Hemispheric Lateralization in Spatial and Verbal Visual Working Memory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About