Distracting Objects Induce Early Quitting in Visual Search

Abstract

Task-irrelevant objects can sometimes capture attention and increase the time it takes an observer to find a target. However, less is known about how these distractors impact visual search strategies. Here, I found that salient distractors reduced rather than increased response times on target-absent trials (Experiment 1; N = 200). Combined with higher error rates on target-present trials, these results indicate that distractors can induce observers to quit search earlier than they otherwise would. These effects were replicated when target prevalence was low (Experiment 2; N = 200) and with different stimuli that elicited shallower search slopes (Experiment 3; N = 75). These results demonstrate that salient distractors can produce at least two consequences in visual search: They can capture attention, and they can cause observers to quit searching early. This novel finding has implications both for understanding visual attention and for examining distraction in real-world domains where targets are often absent, such as medical image screening.

Keywords

attention visual attention visual search open data

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adamo

S. H.

Cain

M. S.

Mitroff

S. R.

(2015). Targets need their own personal space: Effects of clutter on multiple-target search accuracy. Perception, 44, 1203–1214.

Adamo

S. H.

Cain

M. S.

Mitroff

S. R.

(2017). An individual differences approach to multiple-target visual search errors: How search errors relate to different characteristics of attention. Vision Research, 141, 258–265.

Adamo

S. H.

Cain

M. S.

Mitroff

S. R.

(2018). Satisfaction at last: Evidence for the ‘satisfaction’ account for multiple-target search errors. In Nishikawa

R. M.

Samuelson

F. W.

(Eds.), Medical imaging 2018: Image perception, observer performance, and technology assessment (Vol. 10577, Article 105770A). Bellingham, WA: SPIE.

Altmann

E. M.

Trafton

J. G.

Hambrick

D. Z.

(2014). Momentary interruptions can derail the train of thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 215–226. doi:10.1037/a0030986

Anderson

B. A.

Folk

C. L.

(2010). Variations in the magnitude of attentional capture: Testing a two-process model. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 72, 342–352. doi:10.3758/APP.72.2.342

Bacon

W. F.

Egeth

H. E.

(1994). Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture. Perception & Psychophysics, 55, 485–496.

Berbaum

K. S.

Krupinski

E. A.

Schartz

K. M.

Caldwell

R. T.

Madsen

M. T.

Hur

. . . Franken

E. A.

Jr. (2015). Satisfaction of search in chest radiography 2015. Academic Radiology, 22, 1457–1465.

Bravo

M. J.

Nakayama

(1992). The role of attention in different visual-search tasks. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 465–472.

Cain

M. S.

Adamo

S. H.

Mitroff

S. R.

(2013). A taxonomy of errors in multiple-target visual search. Visual Cognition, 21, 899–921.

10.

Chun

Wolfe

J. M.

(1996). Just say no: How are visual searches terminated when there is no target present? Cognitive Psychology, 30, 39–78.

11.

Connor

C. E.

Egeth

H. E.

Yantis

(2004). Visual attention: Bottom-up versus top-down. Current Biology, 14, R850–R852. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2004.09.041

12.

Fleck

M. S.

Mitroff

S. R.

(2007). Rare targets are rarely missed in correctable search. Psychological Science, 18, 943–947. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02006.x

13.

Folk

Remington

Johnston

(1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 1030–1044.

14.

Franconeri

S. L.

Simons

D. J.

(2003). Moving and looming stimuli capture attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 999–1010.

15.

Freer

T. W.

Ulissey

M. J.

(2001). Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: Prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology, 220, 781–786.

16.

Gaspar

J. M.

McDonald

J. J.

(2014). Suppression of salient objects prevents distraction in visual search. The Journal of Neuroscience, 34, 5658–5666. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4161-13.2014

17.

Geyer

Müller

H. J.

Krummenacher

(2008). Expectancies modulate attentional capture by salient color singletons. Vision Research, 48, 1315–1326.

18.

Gureckis

T. M.

Martin

McDonnell

Rich

A. S.

Markant

Coenen

. . . Chan

(2016). psiTurk: An open-source framework for conducting replicable behavioral experiments online. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 829–842.

19.

Leber

Egeth

(2006). It’s under control: Top-down search strategies can override attentional capture. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 132–138.

20.

McDonnell

J. V.

Martin

J. B.

Markant

D. B.

Coenen

Rich

A. S.

Gureckis

T. M.

(2012). psiTurk (Version 1.02) [Computer software]. Retrieved from https://github.com/NYUCCL/psiTurk

21.

Moran

Zehetleitner

Müller

H. J.

Usher

(2013). Competitive guided search: Meeting the challenge of benchmark RT distributions. Journal of Vision, 13(8), Article 24. doi:10.1167/13.8.24

22.

Paolacci

Chandler

(2014). Inside the Turk: Understanding Mechanical Turk as a participant pool. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 184–188. doi:10.1177/0963721414531598

23.

Reed

A. V.

(1973). Speed-accuracy trade-off in recognition memory. Science, 181, 574–576.

24.

Solman

G. J.

Cheyne

J. A.

Smilek

(2011). Memory load affects visual search processes without influencing search efficiency. Vision Research, 51, 1185–1191.

25.

Theeuwes

(1992). Perceptual selectivity for color and form. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 599–606.

26.

Theeuwes

(2010). Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychologica, 135, 77–99. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.006

27.

Thompson

K. G.

Bichot

N. P.

(2005). A visual salience map in the primate frontal eye field. Progress in Brain Research, 147, 249–262.

28.

Treisman

A. M.

Gelade

(1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97–136.

29.

Tuddenham

W. J

. (1962). Visual search, image organization, and reader error in roentgen diagnosis: Studies of the Psychophysiology of Roentgen Image Perception Memorial Fund Lecture. Radiology, 78, 694–704.

30.

Van Selst

Jolicoeur

. (1994). A solution to the effect of sample size on outlier elimination. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 47, 631–650.

31.

Watson

M. R.

Brennan

A. A.

Kingstone

Enns

J. T.

(2010). Looking versus seeing: Strategies alter eye movements during visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 543–549.

32.

Williams

L. H.

Drew

(2017). Distraction in diagnostic radiology: How is search through volumetric medical images affected by interruptions? Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2, Article 12. doi:10.1186/s41235-017-0050-y

33.

Wolfe

J. M.

(2012). When do I quit? The search termination problem in visual search. In Dodd

Flowers

(Eds.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: The influence of attention, learning, and motivation on visual search (pp. 183–208). New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-4794-8_8

34.

Wolfe

J. M.

(2018). Visual search. In Wixted

J. T.

(Ed.), Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience (4th ed., Vol. 2). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. doi:10.1002/9781119170174.epcn213

35.

Wolfe

J. M.

Horowitz

T. S.

Kenner

N. M.

(2005). Rare items often missed in visual searches. Nature, 435, 439–440. doi:10.1038/435439a

36.

Wolfe

J. M.

Horowitz

T. S.

Van Wert

M. J.

Kenner

N. M.

Place

S. S.

Kibbi

(2007). Low target prevalence is a stubborn source of errors in visual search tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 623–638.

37.

Wolfe

J. M.

Van Wert

M. J.

(2010). Varying target prevalence reveals two dissociable decision criteria in visual search. Current Biology, 20, 121–124. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2009.11.066

38.

Yantis

Egeth

(1999). On the distinction between visual salience and stimulus-driven attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 661–676.

39.

Yantis

Jonides

(1984). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Evidence from visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 601–621.

40.

Yeh

S.-L.

Liao

H.-I.

(2010). On the generality of the displaywide contingent orienting hypothesis: Can a visual onset capture attention without top-down control settings for displaywide onset? Acta Psychologica, 135, 159–167. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.05.013

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.28 MB

0.04 MB