Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 314–318 | Cite as

Eye gaze is not unique: Automatic orienting in response to uninformative arrows

Brief Reports
  • 1.9k Downloads

Abstract

Recent studies (Driver et al., 1999; Friesen & Kingstone, 1998; Langton & Bruce, 1999) have argued that the perception of eye gaze may be unique, as compared with other symbolic cues (e.g., arrows), in being able to automatically trigger attentional orienting. In Experiment 1, 17 participants took part in a visuospatial orienting task to investigate whether arrow cues might also trigger automatic orienting. Two arrow cues were presented for 75 msec to the left and right of a fixation asterisk. After an interval of either 25 or 225 msec, the letter O or X appeared. After both time intervals, mean response times were reliably faster when the arrows pointed toward, rather than away from, the location of the target letter. This occurred despite the fact that the participants were informed that the arrows did not predict where the target would appear. In Experiment 2, the same pattern of data was recorded when several adjustments had been made in an attempt to rule out alternative explanations for the cuing effects. Overall, the findings suggest that the eye gaze is not unique in automatically triggering orienting.

References

  1. Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). The eye direction detector (EDD) and the shared attention mechanism (SAM): Two cases for evolutionary psychology. In C. Moore & P. Dunham (Eds.),Joint attention: Its origins and role in development (pp. 41–59). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  2. Bruner, J. (1983).Child’s talk: Learning to use language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., &Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: An interactive graphic for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers.Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,25, 257–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Driver, J., Davis, G., Ricciardelli, P., Kidd, P., Maxwell, E., &Baron-Cohen, S. (1999). Gaze perception triggers reflexive visuospatial orienting.Visual Cognition,6, 509–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Friesen, C. K., &Kingstone, A. (1998). The eyes have it! Reflexive orienting is triggered by nonpredictive gaze.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,5, 490–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jonides, J. (1981). Voluntary versus automatic control over the mind’s eye’s movement. In J. [B.] Long & A. [D.] Baddeley (Eds.),Attention and performance IX (pp. 187–203). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  7. Langton, S. R. H., &Bruce, V. (1999). Reflexive visual orienting in response to the social attention of others.Visual Cognition,6, 541–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Müller, H. J., &Rabbitt, P. M. A. (1989). Reflexive and voluntary orienting of visual attention: Time course of activation and resistance to interruption.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,15, 315–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Perrett, D., &Emery, N. J. (1994). Understanding the intentions of others from visual signals: Neuropsychological evidence.Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive,13, 683–694.Google Scholar
  10. Posner, M. I. (1978).Chronometric explorations of mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  11. Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,32A, 3–25.Google Scholar
  12. Posner, M. I., &Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bowhuis (Eds.),Attention and performance X: Control of language processes (pp. 531–556). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  13. Remington, R. W., Johnston, J. C., &Yantis, S. (1992). Involuntary attentional capture by abrupt onsets.Perception & Psychophysics,51, 279–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of HullHullEngland

Personalised recommendations