Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 15828974

Do new objects capture attention?

Abstract

The visual system relies on several heuristics to direct attention to important locations and objects. One of these mechanisms directs attention to sudden changes in the environment. Although a substantial body of research suggests that this capture of attention occurs only for the abrupt appearance of a new perceptual object, more recent evidence shows that some luminance-based transients (e.g., motion and looming) and some types of brightness change also capture attention. These findings show that new objects are not necessary for attention capture. The present study tested whether they are even sufficient. That is, does a new object attract attention because the visual system is sensitive to new objects or because it is sensitive to the transients that new objects create? In two experiments using a visual search task, new objects did not capture attention unless they created a strong local luminance transient.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Steven L Franconeri, Andrew Hollingworth, Daniel J Simons. 2005. Do new objects capture attention?. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01528.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Unified structural equation modeling approach for the analysis of multisubject, multivariate functional MRI data.

The ultimate goal of brain connectivity studies is to propose, test, modify, and compare certain directional brain pathways. Path analysis or structural equation modeling (SEM) is an ideal statistical method for such studies. In this work, we propose a two-stage unified SEM plus GLM (General Linear Model) approach for the analysis of multisubject, multivariate functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) time series data with subject-level covariates. In Stage 1, we analyze the fMRI multivariate time series for each subject individually via a unified SEM model by combining longitudinal pathways represented by a multivariate autoregressive (MAR) model, and contemporaneous pathways represented by a conventional SEM. In Stage 2, the resulting subject-level path coefficients are merged with subject-level covariates such as gender, age, IQ, etc., to examine the impact of these covariates on effective connectivity via a GLM. Our approach is exemplified via the analysis of an fMRI visual attention experiment. Furthermore, the significant path network from the unified SEM analysis is compared to that from a conventional SEM analysis without incorporating the longitudinal information as well as that from a Dynamic Causal Modeling (DCM) approach.

Attention↗

Individual differences in the asymmetry of binocular saccades, analysed with mixed-effects models.

We analysed the reliability of individual differences in parameters of binocular saccadic eye movements. During saccades between isovergent targets, the movement of the right and left eye are not exactly symmetrical (conjugate). Typically, the abducting eye has a shorter latency and reaches a higher velocity, so that a transient divergence occurs during the saccade. For the asymmetry in latency and for the maximum of transient divergence, we applied statistical mixed-effects models in a repeated-measures design with 39 subjects and found that the variability between subjects was much larger than the variability from Sessions 1 to 2 (about 8 days later). The retest correlations were 0.54 for the latency difference, and 0.82 for the transient divergence maximum. We conclude that significant individual differences exist in the asymmetry of binocular saccades and that these can be observed with about 20 saccadic trials per subject.

Attention↗