Cargando…

No Advantage for Separating Overt and Covert Attention in Visual Search

We move our eyes roughly three times every second while searching complex scenes, but covert attention helps to guide where we allocate those overt fixations. Covert attention may be allocated reflexively or voluntarily, and speeds the rate of information processing at the attended location. Reducin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: MacInnes, W. Joseph, Jóhannesson, Ómar I., Chetverikov, Andrey, Kristjánsson, Árni
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7356832/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32443506
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vision4020028
_version_ 1783558572441862144
author MacInnes, W. Joseph
Jóhannesson, Ómar I.
Chetverikov, Andrey
Kristjánsson, Árni
author_facet MacInnes, W. Joseph
Jóhannesson, Ómar I.
Chetverikov, Andrey
Kristjánsson, Árni
author_sort MacInnes, W. Joseph
collection PubMed
description We move our eyes roughly three times every second while searching complex scenes, but covert attention helps to guide where we allocate those overt fixations. Covert attention may be allocated reflexively or voluntarily, and speeds the rate of information processing at the attended location. Reducing access to covert attention hinders performance, but it is not known to what degree the locus of covert attention is tied to the current gaze position. We compared visual search performance in a traditional gaze-contingent display, with a second task where a similarly sized contingent window is controlled with a mouse, allowing a covert aperture to be controlled independently by overt gaze. Larger apertures improved performance for both the mouse- and gaze-contingent trials, suggesting that covert attention was beneficial regardless of control type. We also found evidence that participants used the mouse-controlled aperture somewhat independently of gaze position, suggesting that participants attempted to untether their covert and overt attention when possible. This untethering manipulation, however, resulted in an overall cost to search performance, a result at odds with previous results in a change blindness paradigm. Untethering covert and overt attention may therefore have costs or benefits depending on the task demands in each case.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7356832
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73568322020-07-22 No Advantage for Separating Overt and Covert Attention in Visual Search MacInnes, W. Joseph Jóhannesson, Ómar I. Chetverikov, Andrey Kristjánsson, Árni Vision (Basel) Article We move our eyes roughly three times every second while searching complex scenes, but covert attention helps to guide where we allocate those overt fixations. Covert attention may be allocated reflexively or voluntarily, and speeds the rate of information processing at the attended location. Reducing access to covert attention hinders performance, but it is not known to what degree the locus of covert attention is tied to the current gaze position. We compared visual search performance in a traditional gaze-contingent display, with a second task where a similarly sized contingent window is controlled with a mouse, allowing a covert aperture to be controlled independently by overt gaze. Larger apertures improved performance for both the mouse- and gaze-contingent trials, suggesting that covert attention was beneficial regardless of control type. We also found evidence that participants used the mouse-controlled aperture somewhat independently of gaze position, suggesting that participants attempted to untether their covert and overt attention when possible. This untethering manipulation, however, resulted in an overall cost to search performance, a result at odds with previous results in a change blindness paradigm. Untethering covert and overt attention may therefore have costs or benefits depending on the task demands in each case. MDPI 2020-05-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7356832/ /pubmed/32443506 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vision4020028 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
MacInnes, W. Joseph
Jóhannesson, Ómar I.
Chetverikov, Andrey
Kristjánsson, Árni
No Advantage for Separating Overt and Covert Attention in Visual Search
title No Advantage for Separating Overt and Covert Attention in Visual Search
title_full No Advantage for Separating Overt and Covert Attention in Visual Search
title_fullStr No Advantage for Separating Overt and Covert Attention in Visual Search
title_full_unstemmed No Advantage for Separating Overt and Covert Attention in Visual Search
title_short No Advantage for Separating Overt and Covert Attention in Visual Search
title_sort no advantage for separating overt and covert attention in visual search
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7356832/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32443506
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vision4020028
work_keys_str_mv AT macinneswjoseph noadvantageforseparatingovertandcovertattentioninvisualsearch
AT johannessonomari noadvantageforseparatingovertandcovertattentioninvisualsearch
AT chetverikovandrey noadvantageforseparatingovertandcovertattentioninvisualsearch
AT kristjanssonarni noadvantageforseparatingovertandcovertattentioninvisualsearch