Michael von Grünau

The Detection of Gaze Direction: A Stare-In-The-Crowd Effect

A visual-search paradigm was used to explore the relative ease with which the direction of gaze can be detected. Straight-gaze stimuli were presented as targets within a variable number of distractors with left-averted or right-averted gaze. Reaction time in this case was compared with that when either the left-averted or right-averted gaze stimuli were the targets among distractors of the two remaining gaze directions. The data were examined for the existence of a search asymmetry favoring the straight-gaze targets. Such an asymmetry was found with stimuli that were realistically drawn renditions of pairs of human eyes, as well as with similar schematic stimuli representing pairs of human eyes. The asymmetry, however, was not found with geometric control stimuli, which also presented the critical feature in the central, the left-lateral, or the right-lateral position within the stimulus, but were not eyelike. It was also not found for schematic stimuli consisting of only one eye. It was concluded that the straight gaze direction is a special stimulus with eyelike stimuli, which the visual system is set up to process faster and with fewer errors than averted gaze directions. The results are discussed in terms of the evolutionary significance of the straight gaze direction.

Interattribute apparent motion

Apparent motion can be seen between two alternating stimuli even if they are defined with respect to their background by attributes other than luminance (such as color, or texture). We measured motion strength as the maximum separation between two alternating stimuli which produced an impression of motion, for conditions in which the two stimuli were defined by the same attribute (intra-attribute) as well as conditions in which they were defined by different attributes (interattribute). The attributes used to define the stimuli were luminance, color, texture, relative motion, or stereopsis. The results indicate that motion was seen for all the intra-attribute conditions about equally well. The results also show that interattribute motion could be seen for all combinations studied. The motion strength in these cases was about 80% of that for the intra-attribute conditions. The process responsible for this motion perception must therefore be able to combine information from different attributes.

The influence of two spatially distinct primers and attribute priming on motion induction

In a series of experiments, we demonstrate the effects of two spatially distinct primers on motion induction (MI) and the influence of attribute characteristics on the resulting collision site. MI means that a primer such as a spot produces a motion sensation in a subsequently presented geometrical pattern such as a line or a rectangle. This pattern will appear to grow out of the spot. In the present paper we report that when two different locations of the visual field are activated simultaneously by presenting two spots prior to a bar between these spots, there is a motion sensation of two bars growing away from the spots and colliding in the centre (split priming effect). Attribute characteristics can have profound effects on this illusion. When two differently coloured isoluminant spots are presented and the subsequent bar is composed of either one of these colours, the induced motion is away from the spot of identical colour. We call this effect attribute priming. Manipulating the delay between the spot presentations (SOA) showed that timing had a strong effect on split priming, but very little on attribute priming. For split priming experiments with dichoptic presentations, we show that at shorter SOAs there is a dominant effect of the primer which is presented to the same eye as the bar, as opposed to the usual dominance of the later primer. For longer SOAs, however, the temporal sequence of the primers also plays a role in motion induction. Further, we report that geometrical arrangements can strongly influence the direction of perceived motion when more than a single primer is used. Generally, in motion induction with two primers, unlike what is found with a single primer, there appears to be a dominance of low-level effects such as geometry, attributes, and eye of presentation. For dichoptic presentations, however, this can be overcome for longer SOAs. The differences between the single and split priming paradigms are discussed in terms of the differential contribution of bottom-up and top-down processes.

Intraattribute and Interattribute Motion Induction

The phenomenon of motion induction occurs, for example, when a bar that is presented next to a spot, which itself was presented slightly earlier, is not correctly perceived to appear everywhere simultaneously, but seems to grow out of the spot. The spot is said to prime one end of the bar. Experiments have been designed to throw more light on the local and global aspects of this phenomenon, in particular to establish whether this illusory motion percept can be observed when the spot and the bar stimuli are defined with respect to the background by one of a variety of attributes, such as luminance, color, stereodepth (crossed and uncrossed), texture, and motion (start and stop). It was found that all attribute combinations supported motion induction readily, but that the strength of the perceived motion (as measured by magnitude estimation) varied and depended more on the attribute defining the bar than on the attribute of the spot. Luminance and color gave the most vivid effects, whereas motion and depth showed the least vivid effects. The influence of the amount of luminance and color contrast on the strength of the effect was also determined and it was found that these variables affected motion induction most at very low contrast levels close to detection threshold. It is concluded that the illusory motion in this effect depends only slightly on the particular visual attribute channel that carries the stimulus information. This is consistent with the contention that it is a high-level, attention-related effect, phenomenologically similar to polarized gamma movement.

Two Contributions to Motion Induction: A Preattentive Effect and Facilitation due to Attentional Capture

By combining the paradigms of motion induction (presentation of an inducing stimulus, followed after a short delay by the presentation of an elongated bar next to it) and visual search (many-item displays with or without a pop-out target), it was possible to demonstrate the existence of two separate contributions to the motion induction effect. Illusory motion in the test bar could be produced either preattentively or by facilitation due to attentional capture. The former effect is fast, independent of the delay between the inducers and the test bar and operating simultaneously at all locations across the visual display, the latter is slower (full strength in 200-300 msec) and confined to the vicinity of the pop-out inducer. The two possibly also differ in their spatial extent, the attentional capture effect extending over a larger area around the inducer. We conclude that the motion induction effect can be used to show the existence of several effects due to the sudden presentation of a visual stimulus.

Visual search asymmetry for viewing direction

In visual search experiments, we examined the existence of a search asymmetry for the direction with which three-dimensional objects are viewed. It was found that an upward-tilted target object among downward-tilted distracting objects was detected faster than when the orientation of target and distractors was reversed. This indicates that the early visual process regards objects tilted downward with respect to the observer as the situation that is more likely to be encountered. That is, the system is set up to expect to see the tops of these objects. We also found a visual field anisotropy, in that the asymmetry was more pronounced in the lower visual field. These findings are consistent with the idea that the tops of objects are usually situated in the lower visual field and less often in the upper field. Examination of the conditions under which the asymmetry and the anisotropy occur demonstrated the importance of the three-dimensional nature of the stimulus objects. Early visual processing thus makes use of heuristics that take into account specific relationships between the relative locations in space of the observer and 3-D objects.

Attentional blink differences between adolescent dyslexic and normal readers

The goal of this study was to evaluate the possibility that dyslexic individuals require more working memory resources than normal readers to shift attention from stimulus to stimulus. To test this hypothesis, normal and dyslexic adolescents participated in a Rapid Serial Visual Presentation experiment (Raymond, Shapiro, & Arnell, 1992). Surprisingly, the result showed that the participants with dyslexia produced a shallower attentional blink than normal controls. This result may be interpreted as showing differences in the way the two groups encode information in episodic memory. They also fit in a cascade-effect perspective of developmental dyslexia.

Measuring the Attentional Speed-up in the Motion Induction Effect

Motion induction is the illusory motion within an elongated stimulus, such as a bar or a line, when it is preceded by a priming stimulus next to one of its ends. Motion is away from this primer. The presentation of two priming spots at both ends of a stimulus bar results in motion away from both spots with a collision in the center of the bar. With a sufficiently long delay between the spots, motion will be seen only as away from the second spot. Similarly, in a bar with a luminance gradient an illusory motion is perceived as away from the high-luminance end, presumably due to the known dependence of neural processing speed on luminance. In the present study, these two illusory motions were made to oppose each other. The particular luminance gradient which would just cancel the motion induction effect when motion is seen optimally as away from the second spot (cancellation gradient) was determined, resulting again in a collision near the center of the bar. Furthermore, the luminance dependence of the reaction time to stimulus detection was measured in a separate experiment. Thus for each observer, the processing time difference associated with the cancellation gradient was established. This delta t then gives the amount of time by which processing is speeded up in motion induction due to the priming spot. In a simple model of motion processing it can also be identified as the built-in delay delta t of a typical Reichardt-type motion detector. With the present conditions, it varied between 14 and 19 msec for different observers for a bar length of 5.3 deg. In this way, we show not only that the priming effect in motion induction can be understood as a speed-up of neural processing, but also provide a way of measuring the times involved. In additional experiments, we examined the effect of bar length and luminance profile. These results allow us to estimate the gradients of the attentional fields.

Processing Speed in the Motion-Induction Effect

The motion-induction effect, where an illusory motion is perceived within a bar when it is shown next to a spot presented slightly earlier, was studied with respect to the idea that it is based on differential processing speeds between the two ends of the bar. First, by using just a bar with a luminance gradient, the existence of a motion illusion (gradient motion) within such a bar was demonstrated, presumably due to the different processing speeds of differential luminances. When such a bar was used in the motion-induction effect, it was shown to modulate, for short delays, the strength of the effect up or down, according to the direction of the gradient with respect to the position of the spot. When the same bar was used in the double-motion-induction effect (split priming), in which motion is usually away from the later spot, it totally determined the perceived direction of illusory motion, independently of gradient direction with respect to the later spot or the time between the two spots. These results demonstrate, on the one hand, that differential local processing speed is a likely mechanism to underlie the motion-induction effect. On the other hand, they also suggest the involvement of other more global (and perhaps top—down) processes.

Local and global factors of similarity in visual search

Effects of the similarity between target and distractors in a visual search task were investigated in several experiments. Both familiar (numerals and letters) and unfamiliar (connected figures in a 5 × 5 matrix) stimuli were used. The observer had to report on the presence or absence of a target among a variable number of homogeneous distractors as fast and as accurately as possible. It was found that physical difference had the same clear effect on processing time far familiar and for unfamiliar stimuli: processing time decreased monotonically with increasing physical difference. Distractors unrelated to the target and those related to the target by a simple transformation (180° rotation, horizontal or vertical reflection) were also compared, while the physical difference was kept constant. For familiar stimuli, transformational relatedness increased processing time in comparison with that fort unrelated stimulus pairs. It was further shown in a scaling experiment that this effect could be accounted for by the amount of perceived similarity of the target-distractor pairs. For unfamiliar stimuli, transformational relatedness did have a smaller and less pronounced effect. Various comparable unrelated distractors resulted in a full range of processing times. Results from a similarity scaling experiment correlated well with the outcome of the experiments with unfamiliar stimuli. These results are interpreted in terms of an underlying continuum of perceived similarity as the basis of the speed of visual search, rather than a dichotomy of parallel versus serial processing.