Abstract
Because of the strong associations between verbal labels and the visual objects that they denote, hearing a word may quickly guide the deployment of visual attention to the named objects. We report six experiments in which we investigated the effect of hearing redundant (noninformative) object labels on the visual processing of multiple objects from the named category. Even though the word cues did not provide additional information to the participants, hearing a label resulted in faster detection of attention probes appearing near the objects denoted by the label. For example, hearing the wordchair resulted in more effective visual processing of all of the chairs in a scene relative to trials in which the participants attended to the chairs without actually hearing the label. This facilitation was mediated by stimulus typicality. Transformations of the stimuli that disrupted their association with the label while preserving the low-level visual features eliminated the facilitative effect of the labels. In the final experiment, we show that hearing a label improves the accuracy of locating multiple items matching the label, even when eye movements are restricted. We posit that verbal labels dynamically modulate visual processing via top-down feedback—an instance of linguistic labels greasing the wheels of perception.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Altmann, G. T. M. (2004). Language-mediated eye movements in the absence of a visual world: The “blank screen paradigm.”Cognition,93, B79-B87.
Bloom, P., &Keil, F. (2001). Thinking through language.Mind & Language,16, 351–367.
Burkell, J. A., &Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1997). Searching through subsets: A test of the visual indexing hypothesis.Spatial Vision,11, 225–258.
Corthout, E., Uttl, B., Walsh, V., Hallett, M., &Cowey, A. (1999). Timing of activity in early visual cortex as revealed by transcranial magnetic stimulation.NeuroReport,10, 2631–2634.
Daoutis, C., Pilling, M., &Davies, I. (2006). Categorical effects in visual search for color.Visual Cognition,14, 217–240.
Deco, G., &Lee, T. S. (2002). A unified model of spatial and object attention based on inter-cortical biased competition.Neurocomputing,44, 775–781.
Dehaene, S., Changeux, J. P., Naccache, L., Sackur, J., &Sergent, C. (2006). Conscious, preconscious, and subliminal processing: A testable taxonomy.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,10, 204–211. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.03.007
Desimone, R., &Duncan, J. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention.Annual Review of Neuroscience,18, 193–222.
Dessalegn, B., &Landau, B. (2008). More than meets the eye: The role of language in binding and maintaining feature conjunctions.Psychological Science,19, 189–195.
Dick, A. (1971). Processing time for naming and categorization of letters and numbers.Perception & Psychophysics,9(3B), 350–352.
Di Lollo, V., Kawahara, J., Zuvic, S. M., &Visser, T. A. (2001). The preattentive emperor has no clothes: A dynamic redressing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,130, 479–492.
Duncan, J. (1983). Category effects in visual search: A failure to replicate the “oh-zero” phenomenon.Perception & Psychophysics,34, 221–232.
Egly, R., Driver, J., &Rafal, R. D. (1994). Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: Evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,123, 161–177.
Enns, J. T., &Lleras, A. (2008). What’s next? New evidence for prediction in human vision.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,12, 327–333. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2008.06.001
Eriksen, C. W., &Hoffman, J. E. (1972). Temporal and spatial characteristics of selective encoding from visual displays.Perception & Psychophysics,12, 201–204.
Esterman, M., &Yantis, S. (2008). Category expectation modulates object-selective cortical activity [Abstract].Journal of Vision,8(6), 555a.
Fahrenfort, J. J., Scholte, H. S., &Lamme, V. A. F. (2007). Masking 1disrupts reentrant processing in human visual cortex.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,19, 1488–1497.
Fahrenfort, J. J., Scholte, H. S., &Lamme, V. A. F. (2008). The spatiotemporal profile of cortical processing leading up to visual perception.Journal of Vision,8 (1, Art. 12), 1–12. doi:10.1167/8.1.12
Felleman, D. J., &Van Essen, D. C. (1991). Distributed hierarchical processing in the primate cerebral cortex.Cerebral Cortex,1, 1–47.
Foxe, J. J., &Simpson, G. V. (2002). Flow of activation from V1 to frontal cortex in humans: A framework for defining “early” visual processing.Experimental Brain Research,142, 139–150.
Gibson, B. S., &Kingstone, A. (2006). Visual attention and the semantics of space: Beyond central and peripheral cues.Psychological Science,17, 622–627.
Gilbert, A. L., Regier, T., Kay, P., &Ivry, R. B. (2006). Whorf hypothesis is supported in the right visual field but not the left.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,103, 489–494.
Gilbert, A. L., Regier, T., Kay, P., &Ivry, R. B. (2008). Support for lateralization of the Whorfian effect beyond the realm of color discrimination.Brain & Language,105, 91–98.
Gilbert, C. D., &Sigman, M. (2007). Brain states: Top-down influences in sensory processing.Neuron,54, 677–696.
Gleitman, H., &Jonides, J. (1976). Cost of categorization in visual search: Incomplete processing of targets and field items.Perception & Psychophysics,20, 281–288.
Gleitman, L., &Papafragou, A. (2005). Language and thought. In K. Holyoak & R. Morrison (Eds.),Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 633–661). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hommel, B., Pratt, J., Colzato, L., &Godijn, R. (2001). Symbolic control of visual attention.Psychological Science,12, 360–365.
Hupé, J.-M., James, A. C., Girard, P., Lomber, S. G., Payne, B. R., &Bullier, J. (2001). Feedback connections act on the early part of the responses in monkey visual cortex.Journal of Neurophysiology,85, 134–145.
Iordanescu, L., Guzman-Martinez, E., Grabowecky, M., &Suzuki, S. (2008). Characteristic sounds facilitate visual search.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,15, 548–554. doi:10.3758/PBR.15.3.548
Jonides, J., &Gleitman, H. (1976). The benefit of categorization in visual search: Target location without identification.Perception & Psychophysics,20, 289–298.
Kramer, A. F., Weber, T. A., &Watson, S. E. (1997). Object-based attentional selection—Grouped arrays or spatially invariant representations? Comment on Vecera and Farah (1994).Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,126, 3–13.
Kravitz, D. J., &Behrmann, M. (2008). The space of an object: Object attention alters the spatial gradient in the surround.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,34, 298–309.
Kveraga, K., Ghuman, A. S., &Bar, M. (2007). Top-down predictions in the cognitive brain.Brain & Cognition,65, 145–168.
Lamme, V. A., Rodriguez-Rodriguez, V., &Spekreijse, H. (1999). Separate processing dynamics for texture elements, boundaries and surfaces in primary visual cortex of the macaque monkey.Cerebral Cortex,9, 406–413.
Lamme, V. A., &Roelfsema, P. R. (2000). The distinct modes of vision offered by feedforward and recurrent processing.Trends in Neurosciences,23, 571–579.
Li, P., &Gleitman, L. (2002). Turning the tables: Language and spatial reasoning.Cognition,83, 265–294.
Logan, G. D. (1995). Linguistic and conceptual control of visual spatial attention.Cognitive Psychology,28, 103–174.
Logothetis, N. K., &Sheinberg, D. L. (1996). Visual object recognition.Annual Review of Neuroscience,19, 577–621.
Lupyan, G. (2007a).The label feedback hypothesis: Linguistic influences on visual processing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.
Lupyan, G. (2007b). Reuniting categories, language, and perception. In D. S. McNamara & J. G. Trafton (Eds.),Proceedings of the 29th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1247–1252). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Lupyan, G. (2008a). The conceptual grouping effect: Categories matter (and named categories matter more).Cognition,108, 566–577.
Lupyan, G. (2008b). From chair to “chair”: A representational shift account of object labeling effects on memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,137, 348–369.
Lupyan, G., &Spivey, M. (2010). Making the invisible visible: Auditory cues facilitate visual object detection.PLoS ONE,5(7), e11452. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011452
Lupyan, G., &Thompson-Schill, S. (2010). The evocative power of words: Activation of visual information by verbal and nonverbal means. In S. Ohlsson & R. Catrambone (Eds.),Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 883–888). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Lupyan, G., Thompson-Schill, S. L., &Swingley, D. (2010). Conceptual penetration of visual processing.Psychological Science,21, 682–691.
Ma, W. J., Zhou, X., Ross, L. A., Foxe, J. J., &Parra, L. C. (2009). Lip-reading aids word recognition most in moderate noise: A Bayesian explanation using high-dimensional feature space.PLoS ONE,4, e4638. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004638
MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review.Psychological Bulletin,109, 163–203.
Malinowski, P., Fuchs, S., &Müller, M. M. (2007). Sustained division of spatial attention to multiple locations within one hemifield.Neuroscience Letters,414, 65–70.
McGurk, H., &MacDonald, J. (1976). Hearing lips and seeing voices.Nature,264, 746–748.
McMains, S. A., &Somers, D. C. (2004). Multiple spotlights of attentional selection in human visual cortex.Neuron,42, 677–686.
McMains, S. A., &Somers, D. C. (2005). Processing efficiency of divided spatial attention mechanisms in human visual cortex.Journal of Neuroscience,25, 9444–9448.
Mervis, C. B., &Rosch, E. (1981). Categorization of natural objects.Annual Review of Psychology,32, 89–115.
Mesulam, M.-M. (1998). From sensation to cognition.Brain,121, 1013–1052.
Molholm, S., Ritter, W., Javitt, D. C., &Foxe, J. J. (2004). Multisensory visual-auditory object recognition in humans: A high-density electrical mapping study.Cerebral Cortex,14, 452–465. doi:10.1093/ cercor/bhh007
Müller, M. M., &Hübner, R. (2002). Can the spotlight of attention be shaped like a doughnut? Evidence from steady-state visual evoked potentials.Psychological Science,13, 119–124.
Müller, M. M., Malinowski, P., Gruber, T., &Hillyard, S. A. (2003). Sustained division of the attentional spotlight.Nature,424, 309–312.
Müller, N. G., &Kleinschmidt, A. (2003). Dynamic interaction of object- and space-based attention in retinotopic visual areas.Journal of Neuroscience,23, 9812–9816.
Mumford, D. (1992). On the computational architecture of the neocortex II. The role of cortico-cortical loops.Biological Cybernetics,66, 241–251.
Munnich, E., &Landau, B. (2003). The effects of spatial language on spatial representation: Setting some boundaries. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.),Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (pp. 113–155). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Noppeney, U., &Wallesch, C. W. (2000). Language and cognition-Kurt Goldstein’s theory of semantics.Brain & Cognition,44, 367–386.
Olshausen, B. A., Anderson, C. H., &Van Essen, D. C. (1993). A neurobiological model of visual attention and invariant pattern recognition based on dynamic routing of information.Journal of Neuroscience,13, 4700–4719.
Paivio, A. (1986).Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
Pilling, M., Wiggett, A., Ozgen, E., &Davies, I. R. (2003). Is color “categorical perception” really perceptual?Memory & Cognition,31, 538–551.
Pinker, S. (1994).The language instinct. New York: HarperCollins.
Posner, M. I. (1970). On the relationship between letter names and superordinate categories.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,22, 279–287.
Posner, M. I., &Mitchell, R. (1967). Chronometric analysis of classification.Psychological Review,74, 392–409.
Posner, M. I., Snyder, C. R., &Davidson, B. J. (1980). Attention and the detection of signals.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,109, 160–174.
Puri, A. M., &Wojciulik, E. (2008). Expectation both helps and hinders object perception.Vision Research,48, 589–597.
Rao, R. P., &Ballard, D. H. (1999). Predictive coding in the visual cortex: A functional interpretation of some extra-classical receptive field effects.Nature Neuroscience,2, 79–87.
Reali, F., Spivey, M. J., Tyler, M. J., &Terranova, J. (2006). Inefficient conjunction search made efficient by concurrent spoken delivery of target identity.Perception & Psychophysics,68, 959–974.
Roberson, D., &Davidoff, J. (2000). The categorical perception of colors and facial expressions: The effect of verbal interference.Memory & Cognition,28, 977–986.
Rosch, E. H. (1973). On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. In T. E. Moore (Ed.),Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. New York: Academic Press.
Scholl, B. J., &Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1999). Tracking multiple items through occlusion: Clues to visual objecthood.Cognitive Psychology,38, 259–290.
Sekuler, R., Sekuler, A. B., &Lau, R. (1997). Sound alters visual motion perception.Nature,385, 308.
Shams, L., Iwaki, S., Chawla, A., &Bhattacharya, J. (2005). Early modulation of visual cortex by sound: An MEG study.Neuroscience Letters,378, 76–81.
Shams, L., Kamitani, Y., &Shimojo, S. (2002). Visual illusion induced by sound.Cognitive Brain Research,14, 147–152.
Smilek, D., Dixon, M. J., &Merikle, P. M. (2006). Revisiting the category effect: The influence of meaning and search strategy on the efficiency of visual search.Brain Research,1080, 73–90.
Smith, L., &Klein, R. (1990). Evidence for semantic satiation: Repeating a category slows subsequent semantic processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,16, 852–861.
Spivey, M. J., &Dale, R. (2005). On the continuity of mind: Toward a dynamical account of cognition. In B. H. Ross (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 45, pp. 85–142). San Diego: Elsevier.
Spivey, M. J., &Geng, J. J. (2001). Oculomotor mechanisms activated by imagery and memory: Eye movements to absent objects.Psychological Research,65, 235–241.
Spivey, M. J., Tyler, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., &Tanenhaus, M. K. (2001). Linguistically mediated visual search.Psychological Science,12, 282–286.
Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., &Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension.Science,268, 1632–1634.
Vecera, S. P., &Farah, M. J. (1994). Does visual attention select objects or locations?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,123, 146–160.
Vickery, T. J., King, L.-W., &Jiang, Y. (2005). Setting up the target template in visual search.Journal of Vision,5, 81–92. doi:10:1167/5.1.8
Vidyasagar, T. R. (1999). A neuronal model of attentional spotlight: Parietal guiding the temporal.Brain Research Reviews,30, 66–76.
Wang, Q., Cavanagh, P., &Green, M. (1994). Familiarity and pop-out in visual search.Perception & Psychophysics,56, 495–500.
White, M. J. (1977). Identification and categorization in visual search.Memory & Cognition,5, 648–657.
Wiggett, A. J., &Davies, I. R. L. (2008). The effect of Stroop interference on the categorical perception of color.Memory & Cognition,36, 231–239.
Winawer, J., Witthoft, N., Frank, M. C., Wu, L., Wade, A. R., &Boroditsky, L. (2007). Russian blues reveal effects of language on color discrimination.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,104, 7780–7785.
Wolfe, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 202–238.
Wolfe, J. M., Friedman-Hill, S. R., Stewart, M. I., &O’Connell, K. M. (1992). The role of categorization in visual search for orientation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 34–49.
Wolfe, J. M., &Horowitz, T. S. (2004). What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it?Nature Reviews Neuroscience,5, 495–501.
Wolfe, J. M., Horowitz, T. S., Kenner, N., Hyle, M., &Vasan, N. (2004). How fast can you change your mind? The speed of top-down guidance in visual search.Vision Research,44, 1411–1426.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was also supported by NSF Grant BCS-0721297 to M.J.S.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lupyan, G., Spivey, M.J. Redundant spoken labels facilitate perception of multiple items. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 72, 2236–2253 (2010). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196698
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196698