Advertisement

Detection of Object Onset and Offset in Naturalistic Scenes

  • Maria J. Donaldson
  • Naohide Yamamoto
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7463)

Abstract

The present study was conducted to investigate whether observers are equally prone to overlook any kinds of visual events in change blindness. Capitalizing on the finding from visual search studies that abrupt appearance of an object effectively captures observers’ attention, the onset of a new object and the offset of an existing object were contrasted regarding their detectability when they occurred in a naturalistic scene. In an experiment, participants viewed a series of photograph pairs in which layouts of seven or eight objects were depicted. One object either appeared in or disappeared from the layout, and participants tried to detect this change. Results showed that onsets were detected more quickly than offsets, while they were detected with equivalent accuracy. This suggests that the primacy of onset over offset is a robust phenomenon that likely makes onsets more resistant to change blindness under natural viewing conditions.

Keywords

Change blindness change detection scene onset offset 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Levin, D.T., Simons, D.J.: Failure to Detect Changes to Attended Objects in Motion Pictures. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 4, 501–506 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grimes, J.: On the Failure to Detect Changes in Scenes across Saccades. In: Akins, K. (ed.) Perception. Vancouver Studies in Cognitive Science, vol. 5, pp. 89–110. Oxford University Press, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    O’Regan, J.K., Rensink, R.A., Clark, J.J.: Change-Blindness as a Result of ‘Mudsplashes’. Nature 398, 34 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rensink, R.A., O’Regan, J.K., Clark, J.J.: To See or Not to See: The Need for Attention to Perceive Changes in Scenes. Psychol. Sci. 8, 368–373 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arrington, J.G., Levin, D.T., Varakin, D.A.: Color Onsets and Offsets, and Luminance Changes Can Cause Change Blindness. Perception 35, 1665–1678 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rensink, R.A.: Change Detection. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 53, 245–277 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Simons, D.J., Rensink, R.A.: Change Blindness: Past, Present, and Future. Trends Cogn. Sci. 9, 16–20 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Franconeri, S.L., Simons, D.J.: Moving and Looming Stimuli Capture Attention. Percept. Psychophys. 65, 999–1010 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Theeuwes, J.: Stimulus-Driven Capture and Attentional Set: Selective Search for Color and Visual Abrupt Onsets. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 20, 799–806 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yantis, S., Jonides, J.: Abrupt Visual Onsets and Selective Attention: Evidence from Visual Search. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 10, 601–621 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Theeuwes, J.: Exogenous and Endogenous Control of Attention: The Effect of Visual Onsets and Offsets. Percept. Psychophys. 49, 83–90 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cole, G.G., Kentridge, R.W., Heywood, C.A.: Visual Salience in the Change Detection Paradigm: The Special Role of Object Onset. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 30, 464–477 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cole, G.G., Kentridge, R.W., Heywood, C.A.: Detectability of Onsets versus Offsets in the Change Detection Paradigm. J. Vis. 3, 22–31 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cole, G.G., Kuhn, G.: Attentional Capture by Object Appearance and Disappearance. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. (Hove) 63, 147–159 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mondy, S., Coltheart, V.: Detection and Identification of Change in Naturalistic Scenes. Vis. Cogn. 7, 281–296 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brockmole, J.R., Henderson, J.M.: Object Appearance, Disappearance, and Attention Prioritization in Real-World Scenes. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 12, 1061–1067 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cohen, J., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., Provost, J.: PsyScope: An Interactive Graphic System for Designing and Controlling Experiments in the Psychology Laboratory Using Macintosh Computers. Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 25, 257–271 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jiang, Y., Olson, I.R., Chun, M.M.: Organization of Visual Short-Term Memory. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 26, 683–702 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Luck, S.J., Vogel, E.K.: The Capacity of Visual Working Memory for Features and Conjunctions. Nature 390, 279–281 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., Gibbs, B.J.: The Reviewing of Object Files: Object-Specific Integration of Information. Cogn. Psychol. 24, 175–219 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yantis, S.: Stimulus-Driven Attentional Capture. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2, 156–161 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Davoli, C.C., Suszko, J.W., Abrams, R.A.: New Objects Can Capture Attention without a Unique Luminance Transient. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 14, 338–343 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hollingworth, A., Simons, D.J., Franconeri, S.L.: New Objects Do Not Capture Attention without a Sensory Transient. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 72, 1298–1310 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria J. Donaldson
    • 1
  • Naohide Yamamoto
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyCleveland State UniversityClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations