Eye Tracking the Face in the Crowd Task: Why Are Angry Faces Found More Quickly?

Among a crowd of distractor faces, threatening or angry target faces are identified more quickly and accurately than are nonthreatening or happy target faces, a finding known as the “face in the crowd effect.” Two perceptual explanations of the effect have been proposed: (1) the “target orienting” hypothesis (i.e., threatening targets orient attention more quickly than do nonthreatening targets and (2) the “distractor processing” hypothesis (i.e., nonthreatening distractors paired with a threatening target are processed more efficiently than vice versa, leading to quicker detection of threatening targets). Using a task, with real faces and multiple identities, the current study replicated the face in the crowd effect and then, via eye tracking, found greater support for the target orienting hypothesis. Across both the classical search asymmetry paradigm (i.e., one happy target in a crowd of angry distractors vs. one angry target in a crowd of happy distractors) and the constant distractor paradigm (i.e., one happy target in a crowd of neutral distractors vs. one angry target in a crowd of neutral distractors), fewer distractors were fixated before first fixating angry targets relative to happy targets, with no difference in the processing efficiency of distractors. These results suggest that the face in the crowd effect on this task is supported to a greater degree by attentional patterns associated with properties of target rather those of the crowd.     

Reward-Priming of Location in Visual Search

Existing visual search research has demonstrated that the receipt of reward will be beneficial for subsequent perceptual and attentional processing of features that have characterized targets, but detrimental for processing of features that have characterized irrelevant distractors. Here we report a similar effect of reward on location. Observers completed a visual search task in which they selected a target, ignored a salient distractor, and received random-magnitude reward for correct performance. Results show that when target selection garnered rewarding outcome attention is subsequently a.) primed to return to the target location, and b.) biased away from the location that was occupied by the salient, task-irrelevant distractor. These results suggest that in addition to priming features, reward acts to guide visual search by priming contextual locations of visual stimuli.     

Top-Down but Not Bottom-Up Visual Scanning is Affected in Hereditary Pure Cerebellar Ataxia

The aim of this study was to clarify the nature of visual processing deficits caused by cerebellar disorders. We studied the performance of two types of visual search (top-down visual scanning and bottom-up visual scanning) in 18 patients with pure cerebellar types of spinocerebellar degeneration (SCA6: 11; SCA31: 7). The gaze fixation position was recorded with an eye-tracking device while the subjects performed two visual search tasks in which they looked for a target Landolt figure among distractors. In the serial search task, the target was similar to the distractors and the subject had to search for the target by processing each item with top-down visual scanning. In the pop-out search task, the target and distractor were clearly discernible and the visual salience of the target allowed the subjects to detect it by bottom-up visual scanning. The saliency maps clearly showed that the serial search task required top-down visual attention and the pop-out search task required bottom-up visual attention. In the serial search task, the search time to detect the target was significantly longer in SCA patients than in normal subjects, whereas the search time in the pop-out search task was comparable between the two groups. These findings suggested that SCA patients cannot efficiently scan a target using a top-down attentional process, whereas scanning with a bottom-up attentional process is not affected. In the serial search task, the amplitude of saccades was significantly smaller in SCA patients than in normal subjects. The variability of saccade amplitude (saccadic dysmetria), number of re-fixations, and unstable fixation (nystagmus) were larger in SCA patients than in normal subjects, accounting for a substantial proportion of scattered fixations around the items. Saccadic dysmetria, re-fixation, and nystagmus may play important roles in the impaired top-down visual scanning in SCA, hampering precise visual processing of individual items.     

Attentional Switches and Dual-Task Interference

In four experiments, we studied the time course of interference between detection of an oddball orientation target (OT) in an 8-item circular search display, and identification of a letter target (LT) in a central stream of distractor letters. Dual-task performance for different temporal lags between targets was compared to single-task performance. When the LT preceded the OT, dual-task performance levels were reduced at short inter-target intervals of 0 and 166 ms; when the OT preceded the LT, the dual-task interference was unexpectedly stronger and lasted for up to 500 ms. Resource competition due to temporally overlapping target processing cannot account for this result, because the feature search task is easier than the letter identification task, and therefore would have generated less interference when presented first. Two alternative explanations were explored. First, by manipulating the spatial inter-target distance, we investigated to what degree there is a penalty associated with directing the attentional window from a large object (the search display) to a smaller object (the central letter stream). Second, by varying the duration of the OT and subsequent mask, we studied whether the interference was caused by the difficulty of disengaging attention from the search display. Results support this second explanation and thus indicate that switching attention to the letter stream is hampered by the continuing presence of (masked) search display items. This result shows that attentional effects may play a major role in dual-task execution and can easily obscure interference due to other factors such as resource competition.     

Negative priming under rapid serial visual presentation

Negative priming (NP) was examined under a new paradigm wherein a target and distractors were temporally separated using rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP). The results from the two experiments revealed that (a) NP was robust under RSVP, such that the responses to a target were slower when the target served as a distractor in a previous trial than when it did not; (b) NP was found regardless of whether the distractors appeared before or after the targets; and (c) NP was stronger when the distractor was more distinctive. These findings are generally similar to those on NP in the spatial search task. The implications for the processes causing NP under RSVP are discussed in the current paper.     

Preparatory effects of distractor suppression: evidence from visual cortex

Spatial selective attention is the mechanism that facilitates the selection of relevant information over irrelevant information in the visual field. The current study investigated whether foreknowledge of the presence or absence of distractors surrounding an impending target stimulus results in preparatory changes in visual cortex. We cued the location of the target and the presence or absence of distractors surrounding the target while changes in blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) signals were measured. In line with prior work, we found that top-down spatial attention resulted in an increased contralateral BOLD response, evoked by the cue throughout early visual cortex (areas V1, V2 and V3). In addition, cues indicating distractor presence evoked a substantial increase in the magnitude of the BOLD signal in visual area V3, but not in V2 or V1. This study shows that prior knowledge concerning the presence of a distractor results in enhanced attentional modulation of visual cortex, in visual areas where neuronal receptive fields are large enough to encompass both targets and distractors. We interpret these findings as evidence that top-down attentional control processes include active preparatory suppression mechanisms for irrelevant, distracting information in the visual scene.     

Top-down modulation of lateral interactions in early vision: does attention affect integration of the whole or just perception of the parts?

Attention can modulate sensitivity to local stimuli in early vision. But, can attention also modulate integration of local stimuli into global visual patterns? We recently measured effects of attention on the phenomenon of lateral interactions between collinear elements, commonly thought to reflect long-range mechanisms in early visual cortex underlying contour integration. We showed improved detection of low-contrast central Gabor targets in the context of collinear flankers, but only when the collinear flankers were attended for a secondary task rather than ignored in favor of an orthogonal flanker pair. Here, we contrast two hypotheses for how attention might modulate flanker influences on the target: by changing just local sensitivity to the flankers themselves (flanker-modulation-only hypothesis), or by weighting integrative connections between flanker and target (connection-weighting hypothesis). Modeled on the known nonlinear dependence of target visibility on collinear flanker contrast, the first hypothesis predicts that an increase in physical flanker contrast should readily offset any reduction in their effective contrast when ignored, thus eliminating attentional modulation. Conversely, the second hypothesis predicts that attentional modulation should persist even for the highest flanker contrasts. Our results showed the latter outcome and indicated that attention modulates flanker-target integration, rather than just processing of local flanker elements.     

Distractor Suppression When Attention Fails: Behavioral Evidence for a Flexible Selective Attention Mechanism

Despite consistent evidence showing that attention is a multifaceted mechanism that can operate at multiple levels of processing depending on the structure and demands of the task, investigations of the attentional blink phenomenon have consistently shown that the impairment in reporting the second of two targets typically occurs at a late, or post-perceptual, stage of processing. This suggests that the attentional blink phenomenon may represent the operation of a unique attentional mechanism that is not as flexible as other attentional mechanisms. To test whether the attentional blink is a fixed or flexible phenomenon, we manipulated first target task demands (i.e., difficulty) and measured the influence this had on processing a subsequently presented distractor and the second target. If the attentional blink represents a mechanism that is fixed and consistently fails at a single stage of processing, then manipulations of task difficulty should not affect distractor processing. However, if the attentional blink represents a more multifaceted and flexible mechanism, then task difficulty should modulate distractor processing. The results revealed that distractor processing during the AB was attenuated under high task difficulty. In addition, unlike previous studies, we failed to find a correlation between distractor processing and the severity of the attentional blink. Using a simulation, we demonstrate that the previously reported correlations may have been spurious and due to using variables that were not independent. Overall, the present results support the conclusion that the selectivity of attention during the AB is flexible and depends on the structure and demands of the task.     

Attentional window set by expected relevance of environmental signals

The existence of an attentional window--a limited region in visual space at which attention is directed--has been invoked to explain why sudden visual onsets may or may not capture overt or covert attention. Here, we test the hypothesis that observers voluntarily control the size of this attentional window to regulate whether or not environmental signals can capture attention. We have used a novel approach to test this: participants eye-movements were tracked while they performed a search task that required dynamic gaze-shifts. During the search task, abrupt onsets were presented that cued the target positions at different levels of congruency. The participant knew these levels. We determined oculomotor capture efficiency for onsets that appeared at different viewing eccentricities. From these, we could derive the participant's attentional window size as a function of onset congruency. We find that the window was small during the presentation of low-congruency onsets, but increased monotonically in size with an increase in the expected congruency of the onsets. This indicates that the attentional window is under voluntary control and is set according to the expected relevance of environmental signals for the observer's momentary behavioral goals. Moreover, our approach provides a new and exciting method to directly measure the size of the attentional window.     

Attentional capture in rapid serial visual presentation

We examined whether attentional capture can occur during an attentional blink (AB). If attention were 'locked up' during an AB, capture should not occur. To test for capture, we varied the salience of the two targets (T1 and T2) or of a distractor. Salience was controlled by adjusting chromaticity at equiluminance to equate simple reaction times. Experiment 1 demonstrated that the extent of AB varied almost entirely with T2 salience, not with T1 salience. In Experiment 2, a salient distractor between T1 and T2 reduced the AB without affecting its temporal profile; a salient distractor after T2 had no effect on AB. We conclude that attentional capture can occur during the AB, and stimulus salience modulates, rather than overriding, the AB. Independent of the post-attentional (consolidation) mechanism primarily responsible for the AB, stimulus salience affects how an attention gate is triggered (Shih, 2000).     

Adults with Dyslexia Demonstrate Large Effects of Crowding and Detrimental Effects of Distractors in a Visual Tilt Discrimination Task

Previous research has shown that adults with dyslexia (AwD) are disproportionately impacted by close spacing of stimuli and increased numbers of distractors in a visual search task compared to controls [1]. Using an orientation discrimination task, the present study extended these findings to show that even in conditions where target search was not required: (i) AwD had detrimental effects of both crowding and increased numbers of distractors; (ii) AwD had more pronounced difficulty with distractor exclusion in the left visual field and (iii) measures of crowding and distractor exclusion correlated significantly with literacy measures. Furthermore, such difficulties were not accounted for by the presence of covarying symptoms of ADHD in the participant groups. These findings provide further evidence to suggest that the ability to exclude distracting stimuli likely contributes to the reported visual attention difficulties in AwD and to the aetiology of literacy difficulties. The pattern of results is consistent with weaker and asymmetric attention in AwD.     

Learned value magnifies salience-based attentional capture

Visual attention is captured by physically salient stimuli (termed salience-based attentional capture), and by otherwise task-irrelevant stimuli that contain goal-related features (termed contingent attentional capture). Recently, we reported that physically nonsalient stimuli associated with value through reward learning also capture attention involuntarily (Anderson, Laurent, & Yantis, PNAS, 2011). Although it is known that physical salience and goal-relatedness both influence attentional priority, it is unknown whether or how attentional capture by a salient stimulus is modulated by its associated value. Here we show that a physically salient, task-irrelevant distractor previously associated with a large reward slows visual search more than an equally salient distractor previously associated with a smaller reward. This magnification of salience-based attentional capture by learned value extinguishes over several hundred trials. These findings reveal a broad influence of learned value on involuntary attentional capture.     

Distractor inhibition predicts individual differences in the attentional blink

Background

The attentional blink (AB) refers to humans'' impaired ability to detect the second of two targets (T2) in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) stream of distractors if it appears within 200–600 ms of the first target (T1). Here we examined whether humans'' ability to inhibit distractors in the RSVP stream is a key determinant of individual differences in T1 performance and AB magnitude.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We presented subjects with RSVP streams (93.3 ms/item) of letters containing white distractors, a red T1 and a green T2. Subjects'' ability to suppress distractors was assessed by determining the extent to which their second target performance was primed by a preceding distractor that shared the same identity as T2. Individual subjects'' magnitude of T2 priming from this distractor was found to be negatively correlated with their T1 accuracy and positively related to their AB magnitude. In particular, subjects with attenuated ABs showed negative priming (i.e., worse T2 performance when the priming distractor appeared in the RSVP stream compared to when it was absent), whereas those with large ABs displayed positive priming (i.e., better T2 performance when the priming distractor appeared in the RSVP stream compared to when it was absent). Thus, a subject''s ability to suppress distractors, as assessed by T2 priming magnitude, predicted both their T1 performance and AB magnitude.

Conclusions/Significance

These results confirm that distractor suppression plays a key role in RSVP target selection and support the hypothesis that the AB results, at least in part, from a failure of distractor inhibition.     

Distractor Interference during a Choice Limb Reaching Task

According to action-centered models of attention, the patterns of distractor interference that emerge in selective reaching tasks are related to the time and effort required to resolve a race for activation between competing target and non-target response producing processes. Previous studies have only used unimanual aiming tasks and, as such, only examined the effects of competition that occurs within a limb. The results of studies using unimanual aiming movements often reveal an “ipsilateral effect” - distractors on the same side of space as the effector cause greater interference than distractors on the opposite side of space. The cost of the competition when response selection is between the limbs has yet to be addressed. Participants in the present study executed reaching movements to 1 of 4 (2 left, 2 right) possible target locations with and without a distractor. Participants made ipsilateral reaches (left hand to left targets, right hand to right targets). In contrast to studies using unimanual aiming movements, a “contralateral effect” was observed; distractors affording responses for the other hand (in contralateral space) caused more interference than distractors affording responses for the same hand. The findings from the present research demonstrate that when certain portions of response planning must be resolved prior to response initiation, distractors that code for that dimension cause the greatest interference.     

Pre-stimulus activity predicts the winner of top-down vs. bottom-up attentional selection

Our ability to process visual information is fundamentally limited. This leads to competition between sensory information that is relevant for top-down goals and sensory information that is perceptually salient, but task-irrelevant. The aim of the present study was to identify, from EEG recordings, pre-stimulus and pre-saccadic neural activity that could predict whether top-down or bottom-up processes would win the competition for attention on a trial-by-trial basis. We employed a visual search paradigm in which a lateralized low contrast target appeared alone, or with a low (i.e., non-salient) or high contrast (i.e., salient) distractor. Trials with a salient distractor were of primary interest due to the strong competition between top-down knowledge and bottom-up attentional capture. Our results demonstrated that 1) in the 1-sec pre-stimulus interval, frontal alpha (8-12 Hz) activity was higher on trials where the salient distractor captured attention and the first saccade (bottom-up win); and 2) there was a transient pre-saccadic increase in posterior-parietal alpha (7-8 Hz) activity on trials where the first saccade went to the target (top-down win). We propose that the high frontal alpha reflects a disengagement of attentional control whereas the transient posterior alpha time-locked to the saccade indicates sensory inhibition of the salient distractor and suppression of bottom-up oculomotor capture.     

The Role of Spatial Configuration in Multiple Identity Tracking

Background

The simultaneous tracking and identification of multiple moving objects encountered in everyday life requires one to correctly bind identities to objects. In the present study, we investigated the role of spatial configuration made by multiple targets when observers are asked to track multiple moving objects with distinct identities.

Methodology/Principal Findings

The overall spatial configuration made by the targets was manipulated: In the constant condition, the configuration remained as a virtual convex polygon throughout the tracking, and in the collapsed condition, one of the moving targets (critical target) crossed over an edge of the virtual polygon during tracking, destroying it. Identification performance was higher when the configuration remained intact than when it collapsed (Experiments 1a, 1b, and 2). Moreover, destroying the configuration affected the allocation of dynamic attention: the critical target captured more attention than did the other targets. However, observers were worse at identifying the critical target and were more likely to confuse it with the targets that formed the virtual crossed edge (Experiments 3–5). Experiment 6 further showed that the visual system constructs an overall configuration only by using the targets (and not the distractors); identification performance was not affected by whether the distractor violated the spatial configuration.

Conclusions/Significance

In sum, these results suggest that the visual system may integrate targets (but not distractors) into a spatial configuration during multiple identity tracking, which affects the distribution of dynamic attention and the updating of identity-location binding.     

The time course of attention: selection is transient

The time course of attention has often been investigated using a spatial cuing task. However, attention likely consists of multiple components, such as selectivity (resolving competition) and orienting (spatial shifting). Here we sought to investigate the time course of the selective aspect of attention, using a cuing task that did not require spatial shifting. In several experiments, targets were always presented at central fixation, and were preceded by a cue at different cue-target intervals. The selection component of attention was investigated by manipulating the presence of distractors. Regardless of the presence of distractors, an initial rapid performance enhancement was found that reached its maximum at around 100 ms post cue onset. Subsequently, when the target was the only item in the display, performance was sustained, but when the target was accompanied by irrelevant distractor items, performance declined. This temporal pattern matches closely with the transient attention response that has been found in spatial cuing studies, and shows that the selectivity aspect of attention is transient.     

How Does Information Processing Speed Relate to the Attentional Blink?

Background

When observers are asked to identify two targets in rapid sequence, they often suffer profound performance deficits for the second target, even when the spatial location of the targets is known. This attentional blink (AB) is usually attributed to the time required to process a previous target, implying that a link should exist between individual differences in information processing speed and the AB.

Methodology/Principal Findings

The present work investigated this question by examining the relationship between a rapid automatized naming task typically used to assess information-processing speed and the magnitude of the AB. The results indicated that faster processing actually resulted in a greater AB, but only when targets were presented amongst high similarity distractors. When target-distractor similarity was minimal, processing speed was unrelated to the AB.

Conclusions/Significance

Our findings indicate that information-processing speed is unrelated to target processing efficiency per se, but rather to individual differences in observers'' ability to suppress distractors. This is consistent with evidence that individuals who are able to avoid distraction are more efficient at deploying temporal attention, but argues against a direct link between general processing speed and efficient information selection.     

Evidence Inhibition Responds Reactively to the Salience of Distracting Information during Focused Attention

Along with target amplification, distractor inhibition is regarded as a major contributor to selective attention. Some theories suggest that the strength of inhibitory processing is proportional to the salience of the distractor (i.e., inhibition reacts to the distractor intensity). Other theories suggest that the strength of inhibitory processing does not depend on the salience of the distractor (i.e., inhibition does not react to the distractor intensity). The present study aimed to elucidate the relationship between the intensity of a distractor and its subsequent inhibition during focused attention. A flanker task with a variable distractor-target stimulus-onset asynchrony (SOA) was used to measure both distractor interference and distractor inhibition. We manipulated the intensity of the distractor in two separate ways, by varying its distance from the target (Experiment 1) and by varying its brightness (Experiment 2). The results indicate that more intense distractors were associated with both increased interference and stronger distractor inhibition. The latter outcome provides novel support for the reactive inhibition hypothesis, which posits that inhibition reacts to the strength of distractor input, such that more salient distractors elicit stronger inhibition.     

Signals invisible to the collicular and magnocellular pathways can capture visual attention

The retinal projection to the superior colliculus is thought to be important both for stimulus-driven eye movements and for the involuntary capture of attention. It has further been argued that eye-movement planning and attentional orienting share common neural mechanisms. Electrophysiological studies have shown that the superior colliculus receives no direct projections from short-wave-sensitive cones (S cones), and, consistent with this, we found that irrelevant peripheral stimuli visible only to S cones did not produce the saccadic distractor effect produced by luminance stimuli. However, when involuntary orienting was tested in a Posner cueing task, the same S-cone stimuli had normal attentional effects, in that they accelerated or delayed responses to subsequent targets. We conclude that involuntary attentional shifts do not require signals in the direct collicular pathway, or indeed the magnocellular pathway, as our S-cone stimuli were invisible to this channel also.