Lisa N. Jefferies

The Flexible Focus: Whether Spatial Attention Is Unitary or Divided Depends on Observer Goals

The distribution of visual attention has been the topic of much investigation, and various theories have posited that attention is allocated either as a single unitary focus or as multiple independent foci. In the present experiment, we demonstrate that attention can be flexibly deployed as either a unitary or a divided focus in the same experimental task, depending on the observers goals. To assess the distribution of attention, we used a dual-stream Attentional Blink (AB) paradigm and 2 target pairs. One component of the AB, Lag-1 sparing, occurs only if the second target pair appears within the focus of attention. By varying whether the first-target-pair could be expected in a predictable location (always in-stream) or not (unpredictably in-stream or between-streams), observers were encouraged to deploy a divided or a unitary focus, respectively. When the second-target-pair appeared between the streams, Lag-1 sparing occurred for the Unpredictable group (consistent with a unitary focus) but not for the Predictable group (consistent with a divided focus). Thus, diametrically different outcomes occurred for physically identical displays, depending on the expectations of the observer about where spatial attention would be required.

When can spatial attention be deployed in the form of an annulus

Can spatial attention be deployed as an annulus? Some studies have answered this question in the positive, others in the negative. We tested the hypothesis that annular deployment depends on the presence of a suitable structural framework to which attention can be anchored. To this end, we added a structural framework to the displays of a study that failed to find an annular distribution of attention. The targets were displayed in an annular region around a central stream of task-irrelevant distractors which captured attention and impaired target identification. This design was replicated in our No-Anchors condition. In the Anchors condition in Experiments 1 and 2, a square outline was displayed at each of the four possible target locations. Consistent with the idea that attention can be deployed as an annulus only when a visual framework is present, the targets were identified more accurately (Experiment 1) and more rapidly (Experiment 2) when anchors were present than when they were absent. The number of anchors was increased to eight in Experiment 3. In Experiment 4 the central stream was omitted to verify that the enhanced performance did not arise from intrinsic properties of the anchors themselves. In Experiment 5, targets were presented in a blank annular region delimited by two concentric circles, thus obviating the possibility that attention was deployed as four or eight separate foci in Experiments 2 and 3, respectively.

Attending to illusory differences in object size.

Focused visual attention can be shifted between objects and locations (attentional orienting) or expanded and contracted in spatial extent (attentional focusing). Although orienting and focusing both modulate visual processing, they have been shown to be distinct, independent modes of attentional control. Objects play a central role in visual attention, and it is known that high-level object representations guide attentional orienting. It not known, however, whether attentional focusing is driven by low-level object representations (which code object size in terms of retinotopic extent) or by high-level representations (which code perceived size). We manipulated the perceived size of physically identical objects by using line drawings or photographs that induced the Ponzo illusion, in a task requiring the detection of a target within these objects. The distribution of attention was determined by the perceived size and not by the retinotopic size of an attended object, indicating that attentional focusing is guided by high-level object representations.

The exogenous and endogenous control of attentional focusing

Selective visual attention involves prioritizing both the location (orienting) and distribution (focusing) of processing. To date, much more research has examined attentional orienting than focusing. One of the most well-established findings is that orienting can be exogenous, as when a unique change in luminance draws attention to a spatial location (e.g., Theeuwes in Atten Percept Psychophys 51:599–606, 1992; Yantis and Jonides in J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 10:601, 1984), and endogenous, as when a red distractor shape diverts attention when one is looking for a red target (e.g., Bacon and Egeth in Percept Psychophys 55:485–496, 1994; Folk et al. in J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 18:1030, 1992). Here we ask whether attentional focusing—the broadening and contracting of prioritized processing—is influenced by the same two factors. Our methodology involved a dual-stream attentional blink task; participants monitored two spatially separated streams of items for two targets that could appear unpredictably either in the same stream or in opposite streams. The spatial distribution of attention was assessed by examining second-target accuracy in relation to inter-target lag and target location (same or opposite streams). In Experiment 1, we found that attentional contracting was more rapid when the targets differed in luminance from the distractor items. In Experiments 2 and 3, we found that the rate of attentional contracting was slower when there were task-relevant distractors in the stream opposite the first target. These results indicate that the rate of attentional focusing, like orienting, can be modulated by both exogenous and endogenous mechanisms.

Deployment of spatial attention to a structural framework: exogenous (alerting) and endogenous (goal-directed) factors

The main question examined in the present work was whether spatial attention can be deployed to an appropriate structural framework not only endogenously when the framework is displayed continuously, as in previous work, but also exogenously, when it is displayed transiently 100 ms before the target. The results of five experiments answered that question in the negative. We found that the onset transient triggered by a brief presentation of the structural framework did enhance the response to the upcoming target. That enhancement, however, was due not to the framework itself but to the alerting effect produced by its sudden onset, witness the finding that the same enhancement was produced by an onset transient triggered by a featureless stimulus (i.e., by a brief dimming of the entire screen, in the absence of a structural framework). We conclude that spatial attention can be deployed to the region demarcated by a structural framework when it is deployed endogenously but not when it is deployed exogenously. A theoretical account of the results is proposed in terms of the temporal dynamics of the locus cœruleus/norepinephrine neuromodulatory system.

First unitary, then divided: the temporal dynamics of dividing attention

Whether focused visual attention can be divided has been the topic of much investigation, and there is a compelling body of evidence showing that, at least under certain conditions, attention can be divided and deployed as two independent foci. Three experiments were conducted to examine whether attention can be deployed in divided form from the outset, or whether it is first deployed as a unitary focus before being divided. To test this, we adapted the methodology of Jefferies, Enns, and Di Lollo (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 40: 465, 2014), who used a dual-stream Attentional Blink paradigm and two letter-pair targets. One aspect of the AB, Lag-1 sparing, has been shown to occur only if the second target pair appears within the focus of attention. By presenting the second target pair at various spatial locations and assessing the magnitude of Lag-1 sparing, we probed the spatial distribution of attention. By systematically manipulating the stimulus-onset-asynchrony between the targets, we also tracked changes to the spatial distribution of attention over time. The results showed that even under conditions which encourage the division of attention, the attentional focus is first deployed in unitary form before being divided. It is then maintained in divided form only briefly before settling on a single location.

Attention scaling modulates the effective capacity of visual sensory memory

Visual sensory memory (VSM) has a high capacity, but its contents are fleeting. Recent evidence that the breadth of attention strongly influences the efficiency of visual processing suggests that it might also modulate the effective capacity of VSM. We manipulated the breadth of attention with different cue sizes and used the partial-report technique to estimate the capacity of VSM. Whether attention was deployed voluntarily or captured by a salient cue, narrowly focused attention increased the effective capacity of VSM. This study reveals, for the first time, a direct influence of the breadth of attention on the effective capacity of VSM.