A response time cost when different representations of an attended object are integrated
Tóm tắt
When selected, attention is thought to spread across the whole of an object. Such spreading is thought to occur via the integration and mutual enhancement of the different mental representations of said object. Neurophysiological studies have demonstrated that such integration is not instantaneous with selection, but rather occurs after some delay. It is currently unclear whether the time needed for integration to be established has a behavioural consequence. Here, it was found that trials that required integration were responded to more slowly than those that did not, even though correct responses in both could be determined by the same information. These data thus suggest that the time taken for integration between representations to be established has a consequence on behaviour, one that can be observed as a response time cost. Furthermore, these findings enlighten the time-course of integration vis-a-vis the processing of information at different levels of the processing stream.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Baylis, G. C., & Driver, J. (1993). Visual attention and objects: Evidence for hierarchical coding of location. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19(3), 451–470.
Chelazzi, L., Miller, E. K., Duncan, J., & Desimone, R. (2001). Responses of neurons in macaque area V4 during memory-guided visual search. Cerebral Cortex, 11(8), 761–772.
Desimone, R., & Duncan, J. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Revue of Neuroscience, 18, 193–222.
Duncan, J. (1984). Selective attention and the organization of visual information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113(4), 501–517.
Duncan, J., Humphreys, G., & Ward, R. (1997). Competitive brain activity in visual attention. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 7(2), 255–261.
Grill-Spector, K., Kushnir, T., Edelman, S., Avidan, G., Itzchak, Y., & Malach, R. (1999). Differential processing of objects under various viewing conditions in the human lateral occipital complex. Neuron, 24(1), 187–203.
Haenny, P. E., Maunsell, J. H., & Schiller, P. H. (1988). State dependent activity in monkey visual cortex. II. Retinal and extraretinal factors in V4. Experimental Brain Research, 69(2), 245–259.
Hon, N., Thompson, R., Sigala, N., & Duncan, J. (2009). Evidence for long-range feedback in target detection: Detection of semantic targets modulates activity in early visual areas. Neuropsychologia, 47(7), 1721–1727.
Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., & Gibbs, B. J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24(2), 175–219.
Larsen, A., & Bundesen, C. (1978). Size scaling in visual pattern recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4(1), 1–20.
Larsen, A., Bundesen, C., Kyllingsbaek, S., Paulson, O. B., & Law, I. (2000). Brain activation during mental transformation of size. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(5), 763–774.
McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375–407.
Motter, B. C. (1994). Neural correlates of attentive selection for color or luminance in extrastriate area V4. Journal of Neuroscience, 14(4), 2178–2189.
Nishimura, M., Scherf, K. S., Zachariou, V., Tarr, M. J., & Behrmann, M. (2015). Size precedes view: Developmental emergence of invariant object representations in lateral occipital complex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 27(3), 474–491.
O'Craven, K. M., Downing, P. E., & Kanwisher, N. (1999). fMRI evidence for objects as the units of attentional selection. Nature, 401(6753), 584–587.
Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32(1), 3–25.
Rock, I., & Gutman, D. (1981). The effect of inattention on form perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7(2), 275–285.
Roelfsema, P. R. (2006). Cortical algorithms for perceptual grouping. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 29, 203–227.
Roelfsema, P. R., Lamme, V. A., & Spekreijse, H. (1998). Object-based attention in the primary visual cortex of the macaque monkey. Nature, 395(6700), 376–381.
Schoenfeld, M. A., Hopf, J. M., Merkel, C., Heinze, H. J., & Hillyard, S. A. (2014). Object-based attention involves the sequential activation of feature-specific cortical modules. Nature Neuroscience, 17(4), 619–624.
Schoenfeld, M. A., Tempelmann, C., Martinez, A., Hopf, J. M., Sattler, C., Heinze, H. J., & Hillyard, S. A. (2003). Dynamics of feature binding during object-selective attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100(20), 11806–11811.
Snodgrass, J. G., & Vanderwart, M. (1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6(2), 174–215.
Treisman, A., Kahneman, D., & Burkell, J. (1983). Perceptual objects and the cost of filtering. Perception & Psychophysics, 33(6), 527–532.