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

Al-Janabi, Shahd; Greenberg, Adam S.

doi:10.3758/s13414-016-1126-3

Cited by 29 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…reported (Al-Janabi & Greenberg, 2016). In summary, these findings demonstrate that the SDA is (1) driven by target locations that require a shift of attention across the visual field meridians,…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 51%

“…is frequently reported for horizontal objects, whereas a same object cost (i.e., slower RTs to invalid locations on a cued object versus a non-cued object) has been reported for vertical objects (Al-Janabi & Greenberg, 2016;Conci & Müller, 2009;Harrison & Feldman, 2009;Hein, Blaschke, & Rolke, 2016;Pilz, Roggeveen, Creighton, Bennet, & Sekular, 2012). Our work previously investigated this dissociation by comparing the reallocation of object-based attention across the horizontal versus vertical meridian using an 'L'-shaped object (Barnas & Greenberg, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Likewise, the anatomical segregations of the visual system provide another possible explanation for the performance anisotropy, as we've raised previously (Al-Janabi & Greenberg, 2016;Barnas & Greenberg, 2016). Left and right visual field representations are organized contralaterally, imposing an interhemispheric boundary along the vertical meridian (Holtzman, Sidtis, Volpe, Wilson, & Gazzaniga, 1982;Reuter-Lorenz & Fendrich, 1992a).…”

Section: Origins Of the Shift Direction Anisotropymentioning

confidence: 91%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Object-based attention shifts are driven by target location, not object placement

Barnas

Greenberg

2019

Visual Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Object-based attention (OBA) enhances processing within an attended object. We previously found that attention shifts that crossed the visual field meridians were faster horizontally than vertically, which we named a Shift Direction Anisotropy (SDA). We aimed to determine whether the SDA depends upon attention shift meridian crossings of object boundaries, target locations, or both. Participants viewed an 'L'-shaped object and responded to a target at the cued vertex location (valid) or at non-cued object locations offset horizontally (invalid-horizontal) or vertically (invalid-vertical). In Experiment 1, object boundaries and target locations were positioned either crossing or not crossing the meridians. In Experiments 2A and 2B, object boundaries were held constant (always crossing or never crossing the meridians, respectively) while target locations were manipulated (randomly crossing or non-crossing). In Experiments 3A and 3B, target locations were held constant while object boundaries were manipulated. In Experiment 4, the object was removed to determine whether object-based or space-based attentional resources were being deployed. The SDA emerged only when target locations necessitated shifts that crossed the meridians, regardless of object placement, demonstrating that the SDA is driven by target location relative to the meridians and that OBA processes prioritize specific target locations within an object.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 51%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Origins Of the Shift Direction Anisotropymentioning

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Object-based attention shifts are driven by target location, not object placement

Barnas

Greenberg

2019

Visual Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Example of a trial with the cue in the upper-left position, dissimilar rectangle color, and L as the target (F are distractors). Please note that the horizontal meridian score (left displays) takes into account only vertical shifts of attention and thus controls for a potential facilitation effect along the horizontal meridian, as suggested by the meridian facilitation theory (e.g., Al-Janabi & Greenberg, 2016;Pilz et al, 2012). The vertical meridian score (right displays), on the other hand, takes into account only horizontal shifts of attention.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of object similarity and orientation on object-based cueing

Hein

Blaschke²,

Rolke

2016

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Responses to targets that appear at a noncued position within the same object (invalid-same) compared to a noncued position at an equidistant different object (invalid-different) tend to be faster and more accurate. These cueing effects have been taken as evidence that visual attention can be object based (Egly, Driver, & Rafal, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 161-177, 1994). Recent findings, however, have shown that the object-based cueing effect is influenced by object orientation, suggesting that the cueing effect might be due to a more general facilitation of attentional shifts across the horizontal meridian (Al-Janabi & Greenberg, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 1-17, 2016; Pilz, Roggeveen, Creighton, Bennet, & Sekuler, PLOS ONE, 7, e30693, 2012). The aim of this study was to investigate whether the object-based cueing effect is influenced by object similarity and orientation. According to the object-based attention account, objects that are less similar to each other should elicit stronger object-based cueing effects independent of object orientation, whereas the horizontal meridian theory would not predict any effect of object similarity. We manipulated object similarity by using a color (Exp. 1, Exp. 2A) or shape change (Exp. 2B) to distinguish two rectangles in a variation of the classic two-rectangle paradigm (Egly et al., 1994). We found that the object-based cueing effects were influenced by the orientation of the rectangles and strengthened by object dissimilarity. We suggest that object-based cueing effects are strongly affected by the facilitation of attention along the horizontal meridian, but that they also have an object-based attentional component, which is revealed when the dissimilarity between the presented objects is accentuated.

show abstract

“…3), F(4, 84) = 2.56, p = 0.04. We found, here, a cuevalidity effect for all object types (55 ms for visible objects, 102 ms for occluded objects and 88 ms for illusory objects; all ps < 0.01), but a same-object advantage of 29 ms emerged only for the visible objects, t(21) = 2.23, p = 0.04 (for inconsistent findings see Al-Janabi & Greenberg, 2016). All other t-tests were not significant (all ps > 0.05, and all ts < 1.90).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 57%

Object-based attentional selection emerges late in visual cortical hierarchy for objects of varying perceptual strengths

Al-Janabi

Strommer

Gabay

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Object-based attention (OBA) can -in addition to acting upon explicit object representations -act upon occluded and illusory objects. It remains unknown, however, whether or not the selection of such object representations is detectable at the same level within visual cortex. This study examined the level within visual cortex (V1-V3, LOC) at which object-based selection is observed for explicit, occluded and illusory objects. During fMRI acquisition, participants identified a target preceded by a predictive arrow cue in the double-rectangle cueing paradigm. We independently localized retinotopicallyspecific regions of cortex corresponding to all possible target locations to examine neural fluctuations at each level of the visual cortical hierarchy. We found, after cue onset, that activity along visual cortex was not greater for representations of cued than of uncued same object locations. In contrast, we found that activity in V3 was enhanced at retinotopic representations that correspond to uncued same than different object locations. These results, together, support attentional spreading. Additionally, when the target appeared at either the cued or uncued locations, we found higher activation in areas representing uncued same object versus cued locations. This effect emerged along the visual cortical hierarchy. Further, when the target appeared on either the cued or uncued object, we found that activation in V3 transiently increased at uncued same than different object locations. This effect was also detectable upstream in LOC. These results index attentional re-orienting between locations/objects. Effects emerged regardless of object type: explicit or completed. Thus, the gating of object information proceeds completion.

show abstract

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

Abstract: The representational basis of attentional selection can be object-based. Various studies have suggested,

Cited by 29 publications

References 51 publications

Object-based attention shifts are driven by target location, not object placement

Object-based attention shifts are driven by target location, not object placement

The influence of object similarity and orientation on object-based cueing

Object-based attentional selection emerges late in visual cortical hierarchy for objects of varying perceptual strengths

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About