File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Supplementary
-
Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Conference Paper: Dissociating preattentive vision and preattentive attentional guidance
Title | Dissociating preattentive vision and preattentive attentional guidance |
---|---|
Authors | |
Issue Date | 2008 |
Publisher | Vision Sciences Society |
Citation | Vision Sciences Society 8th Annual Meeting (VSS 2008), Naples, FL, 9-14 May 2008 How to Cite? |
Abstract | In Feature Integration Theory (FIT; Treisman & Sato, 1990), efficient visual
search performance can either be driven by preattentive vision, or by
focused attention that is effectively guided by preattentive information.
Whereas independent dimensional modules handle basic feature detection,
a salience map of locations serves to guide attention in other searches.
Recent theoretical models have largely abandoned this distinction; for
example, the guided search theory (Wolfe, 1994) assumes that all searches
are guided by a salience map. Based on an assumption that preattentive
vision does not signal location information, the present study investigated
and provided evidence for a distinction between searches that rely on preattentive
vision and searches that rely on attentional guidance. Participants
detected features or judged target locations (left or right side of the display);
because location information is needed for the location judgement
task, the salience map should be implicated in responses. Results showed
a dissociation between tasks in terms of both dimension-switching costs
and cross-dimension attentional capture, in which dimension-switching occurred only in the target detection task and attentional capture occurred
only in the location judgement task. These results reflect the use of two
different mechanisms, one dimension-specific and the other dimensiongeneral,
which map onto existing proposals for dimensional modules and
the salience map. In a feature discrimination task, results precluded an
explanation based on response mode (detection versus discrimination). We
conclude that the FIT architecture should be adopted to explain the current
results, and that a variety of visual attention findings can be addressed
within this framework. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/110088 |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Chan, KH | en_HK |
dc.contributor.author | Hayward, WG | en_HK |
dc.date.accessioned | 2010-09-26T01:50:39Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2010-09-26T01:50:39Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2008 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.citation | Vision Sciences Society 8th Annual Meeting (VSS 2008), Naples, FL, 9-14 May 2008 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/110088 | - |
dc.description.abstract | In Feature Integration Theory (FIT; Treisman & Sato, 1990), efficient visual search performance can either be driven by preattentive vision, or by focused attention that is effectively guided by preattentive information. Whereas independent dimensional modules handle basic feature detection, a salience map of locations serves to guide attention in other searches. Recent theoretical models have largely abandoned this distinction; for example, the guided search theory (Wolfe, 1994) assumes that all searches are guided by a salience map. Based on an assumption that preattentive vision does not signal location information, the present study investigated and provided evidence for a distinction between searches that rely on preattentive vision and searches that rely on attentional guidance. Participants detected features or judged target locations (left or right side of the display); because location information is needed for the location judgement task, the salience map should be implicated in responses. Results showed a dissociation between tasks in terms of both dimension-switching costs and cross-dimension attentional capture, in which dimension-switching occurred only in the target detection task and attentional capture occurred only in the location judgement task. These results reflect the use of two different mechanisms, one dimension-specific and the other dimensiongeneral, which map onto existing proposals for dimensional modules and the salience map. In a feature discrimination task, results precluded an explanation based on response mode (detection versus discrimination). We conclude that the FIT architecture should be adopted to explain the current results, and that a variety of visual attention findings can be addressed within this framework. | - |
dc.language | eng | en_HK |
dc.publisher | Vision Sciences Society | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting, VSS 2008 | en_HK |
dc.title | Dissociating preattentive vision and preattentive attentional guidance | en_HK |
dc.type | Conference_Paper | en_HK |
dc.identifier.email | Hayward, WG: whayward@hkucc.hku.hk | en_HK |
dc.identifier.authority | Hayward, WG=rp00630 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.hkuros | 145174 | en_HK |