Tracking Multiple Objects Is Limited Only by Object Spacing, Not by Speed, Time, or Capacity

Franconeri, Steven; Jonathan, Sumeeth; Scimeca, Jason M.

doi:10.1177/0956797610373935

Cited by 165 publications

(274 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

249

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, the interference ought to increase with proximity (Shim, Alvarez, & Jiang, 2008), yet the speed limit cost of an additional target here was very similar at two very different separations (Figure 2). Second, in Experiment 2 we kept the opportunity for spatial interactions constant across speeds by equating total distance traveled (following the logic of Franconeri et al, 2010), yet still the second target was very costly for speed limits.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A third theory of attending and tracking is that the limits on performance are imposed by spatial interference among attentional spotlights on targets (Franconeri et al, 2010;Shim, Alvarez, & Jiang, 2008) or crowding of target representations in cortex (Franconeri et al, 2008;Intriligator & Cavanagh, 2001). We will refer to this as "spatial interference theory".…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We will refer to this as "spatial interference theory". The specific suggestion of Franconeri et al (2010) was that the interference involves a field of suppression surrounding each attended target.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To avoid this, in Experiment 2 we adopt the approach introduced by Franconeri et al (2010) of equating the total distance travelled for different speeds. As Franconeri et al pointed out, this should equate the number of opportunities for spatial interactions across speeds.…”

Section: Experiments 2: Constant Travel Distance and Eyetrackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Exhausting attentional tracking resources with a single fast-moving object

Holcombe

Chen

2012

Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highlights• Attentional limits were assessed with wide spacing to avoid object interference.• The speed limit for tracking two objects was much slower than for tracking one.• Attentional resource theory of tracking was supported.• At least two tracking resources, one in each hemisphere.• At fast speeds, performance tracking two no better than predicted by capacity of one. AbstractDriving on a busy road, eluding a group of predators, or playing a team sport involves keeping track of multiple moving objects. In typical laboratory tasks, the number of visual targets that humans can track is about four. Three types of theories have been advanced to explain this limit. The fixed-limit theory posits a set number of attentional pointers available to follow objects. Spatial interference theory proposes that when targets are near each other, their attentional spotlights 2 mutually interfere. Resource theory asserts that a limited resource is divided among targets, and performance reflects the amount available per target. Utilising widely separated objects to avoid spatial interference, the present experiments validated the predictions of resource theory. The fastest target speed at which two targets could be tracked was much slower than the fastest speed at which one target could be tracked. This speed limit for tracking two targets was approximately that predicted if at high speeds, only a single target could be tracked. This result cannot be accommodated by the fixed-limit or interference theories. Evidently a fast target, if it moves fast enough, can exhaust attentional resources.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Experiments 2: Constant Travel Distance and Eyetrackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Exhausting attentional tracking resources with a single fast-moving object

Holcombe

Chen

2012

Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to several current theories, all mental limits that impact tracking ultimately have their impact during these moments (Franconeri et al, 2010;Vul et al, 2009). More specifically, we sought to improve tracking performance via an intervention that would make targets and nontargets less confusable only at those critical moments, as opposed to a global manipulation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Close encounters of the distracting kind: Identifying the cause of visual tracking errors

Bae

Flombaum

2012

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why can we track only so many objects? We addressed this question by asking when and how tracking errors emerge. To test the hypothesis that many tracking errors are target/nontarget confusions emerging from close encounters, we compared standard multiple-object tracking trials with trials on which a nontarget turned a random color whenever it approached within 4°of a target. This manipulation significantly improved performance by alleviating the correspondence challenge of a close encounter. Two control experiments showed that color change benefits were not merely due to target recovery. Follow-up experiments demonstrated that color change benefits did not accrue monotonically with distance but, instead, seemed to obey a step function; and an additional experiment demonstrated that, without color changes, the frequency of close encounters predicts tracking performance. Taken together, these experiments suggest that uncertainty about target location imposes the primary constraint on tracking, at times causing errors by leading to confusions between targets and nontargets.

show abstract

Resource Limitations in Visual Cognition

Liverence

Franconeri

2015

Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual attention and visual working memory are two of the core resources that support visual perception. Foundational research has demonstrated that these resources are highly limited, but an active debate concerns exactly how they are limited. While many classic studies suggested that these resources are fundamentally discrete, with fixed capacity of 3–4 objects maximum, a number of recent studies have argued that these resources are fundamentally continuous, with no fixed upper‐bound to the number of objects that can be attended or remembered. This entry reviews the state of this debate, and shows how convergence between these (often separate) areas of research is a major emerging trend in the field of visual cognition.

show abstract

Tracking Multiple Objects Is Limited Only by Object Spacing, Not by Speed, Time, or Capacity

Cited by 165 publications

References 31 publications

Exhausting attentional tracking resources with a single fast-moving object

Exhausting attentional tracking resources with a single fast-moving object

Close encounters of the distracting kind: Identifying the cause of visual tracking errors

Resource Limitations in Visual Cognition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About