Perception & Psychophysics

, Volume 55, Issue 4, pp 399–411 | Cite as

Visual motion and attentional capture

  • Anne P. Hillstrom
  • Steven Yantis
Article

Abstract

Previous work has shown that abrupt visual onsets capture attention. This occurs even with stimuli that are equiluminant with the background, which suggests that the appearance of a new perceptual object, not merely a change in luminance, captures attention. Three experiments are reported in which this work was extended by investigating the possible role of visual motion in attentional capture. Experiment 1 revealed that motion can efficiently guide attention when it is perfectly informative about the location of a visual search target, but that it does not draw attention when it does not predict the target’s position. This result was obtained with several forms of motion, including oscillation, looming, and nearby moving contours. To account for these and other results, we tested anew-object account of attentional capture in Experiment 2 by using a global/local paradigm. When motion segregated a local letter from its perceptual group, the local letter captured attention as indexed by an effect on latency of response to the task-relevant global configuration. Experiment 3 ruled out the possibility that the motion in Experiment 2 captured attention merely by increasing the salience of the moving object. We argue instead that when motion segregates a perceptual element from a perceptual group, a new perceptual object is created, and this event captures attention. Together, the results suggest that motion as such does not capture attention but that the appearance of a new perceptual object does.

References

  1. Bacon, W. F., & Egeth, H. E. (in press). Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture.Perception & Psychophysics.Google Scholar
  2. Folk, C. L., & Remington, R. W. (in press). The structure of attentional control: Contingent attentional capture by apparent motion, abrupt onset, and color.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.Google Scholar
  3. Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., &Johnston, J. C. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 1030–1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., &Johnston, J. C. (1993). Attentional control settings: A reply to Yantis (1993[b]).Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 682–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Helmholtz, H. Von (1925).Handbook of physiological optics (J. P. C. Southall, Trans.). Rochester, NY: The Optical Society of America. (Original work published 1867)Google Scholar
  6. Hirsch, E. (1982).The concept of identity. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. James, W. (1950).The principles of psychology (Vol. 1). New York: Dover. (Original work published 1890)Google Scholar
  8. Jonides, J. (1981). Voluntary versus automatic control over the mind’s eye’s movements. In L. B. Long & A. D. Baddeley (Eds),Attention and performance IX (pp. 187–203). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. Jonides, J., &Yantis, S. (1988). Uniqueness of abrupt visual onset in capturing attention.Perception & Psychophysics,43, 346–354,Google Scholar
  10. Kahneman, D., &Henik, A. (1981). Perceptual organization and attention. In M. Kubovy & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.),Perceptual organization (pp. 181–211). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  11. Kahneman, D., &Treisman, A. (1984). Changing views of attention and automaticity. In R. Parasuraman & D. R. Davies (Eds.),Varieties of attention (pp. 29–61). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  12. Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., &Gibbs, B. (1992). The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information.Cognitive Psychology,24, 175–219.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Kanwisher, N., &Driver, J. (1992). Objects, attributes, and visual attention: Which, what, and where.Current Directions in Psychological Science,1, 26–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kimchi, R. (1992). Primacy of wholistic processing and global/local paradigm: A critical review.Psychological Bulletin,112, 24–38.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Mack, A., Tang, B., Rock, I., & Stone, W. (1991, November).Apparent motion and attention. Paper presented at the meeting of the Psychonomic Society, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  16. McLeod, P., Driver, J., &Crisp, J. (1988). Visual search for a conjunction of movement and form is parallel.Nature,332, 154–155.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Miller, J. (1981). Global precedence in attention and decision.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,1, 1161–1174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nakayama, K., &Silverman, G. H. (1986). Serial and parallel processing of visual feature conjunctions.Nature,320, 264–265.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Navon, D. (1977). Forest before tress: The precedence of global features in visual perception.Cognitive Psychology,9, 353–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Navon, D. (1981). The forest revisited: More on global precedence.Psychological Research,43, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Paquet, L. (1992). Global and local processing in nonattended objects: A failure to induce local processing dominance.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 516–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Paquet, L., &Merikle, P. M. (1988). Global precedence in attended and nonattended objects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,14, 89–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pomerantz, J. R. (1983). Global and local precedence: Selective attention in form and motion perception.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,112, 516–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pomerantz, J. R., &Sager, L. C. (1975). Asymmetric integrality with dimensions of visual pattern.Perception & Psychophysics,18, 460–466.Google Scholar
  25. Posner, M. I., Snyder, C. R. R., &Davidson, B. J. (1980). Attention and the detection of signals.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,109, 160–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shulman, G. L., &Wilson, J. (1987). Spatial frequency and selective attention to local and global information.Perception,16, 89–101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Theeuwes, J. (1990). Perceptual selectivity is task dependent: Evidence from selective search.Acta Psychologica,74, 81–99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Theeuwes, J. (1992). Perceptual selectivity for color and form.Perception & Psychophysics,51, 599–606.Google Scholar
  29. Treisman, A., &Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention.Cognitive Psychology,12, 97–136.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Treisman A., &Gormican, S. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries.Psychological Review,95, 15–48.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Van Der Heuden, A. H. C. (1992).Selective attention in vision. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Yantis, S. (1993a). Stimulus-driven attentional capture.Current Directions in Psychological Science,2, 156–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yantis, S. (1993b). Stimulus-driven attentional capture and attentional control settings.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 676–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yantis, S., &Hillstrom, A. P. (1994). Stimulus-driven attentional capture: Evidence from equiluminant visual objects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yantis, S., &Johnson, D. N. (1990). Mechanisms of attentional priority.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 812–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yantis, S., &Jones, E. (1991). Mechanisms of attentional selection: Temporally modulated priority tags.Perception & Psychophysics,50, 166–178.Google Scholar
  37. Yantis, S., &Jonides, J. (1984). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Evidence from visual search.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 601–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yantis, S., Meyer, D. E., &Smith, J. E. K. (1991). Analysis of multinomial mixture distributions: New tests for stochastic models of cognition and action.Psychological Bulletin,110, 350–374.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne P. Hillstrom
    • 1
  • Steven Yantis
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimore

Personalised recommendations