For efficient use of limited capacity, the visual system summarizes redundant information and prioritizes relevant information, strategies known respectively as ensemble perception and selective attention. Although previous studies showed a close relationship between these strategies, the specific mechanisms underlying the relationship have not been determined. We investigated how attention modulated mean-size computation. Fourteen people participated in this study. We hypothesized that attention biases mean-size computation by increasing the contribution (weighted averaging) and the apparent size (perceptual enlargement) of an attended item. Consistent with this hypothesis, our results showed that estimated mean sizes were biased toward the attended size and overestimated regardless of the attended size, supporting weighted averaging and perceptual enlargement, respectively. Taken together, the observed effects of selective attention on mean-size computation signify a close relationship between the two optimization mechanisms to achieve efficient management of the visual system’s limited capacity.
AllikJ.ToomM.RaidveeA.AverinK.KreegipuuK. (2013). An almost general theory of mean size perception. Vision Research, 83, 25–39. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2013.02.018
2.
AlvarezG. A. (2011). Representing multiple objects as an ensemble enhances visual cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 122–131. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2011.01.003
3.
AndersonS. F.KelleyK.MaxwellS. E. (2017). Sample-size planning for more accurate statistical power: A method adjusting sample effect sizes for publication bias and uncertainty. Psychological Science, 28, 1547–1562. doi:10.1177/095679761772372
4.
Anton-ErxlebenK.CarrascoM. (2013). Attentional enhancement of spatial resolution: Linking behavioural and neurophysiological evidence. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14, 188–200. doi:10.1038/nrn3443
5.
BaekJ.ChongS. C. (2020). Distributed attention model of perceptual averaging. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 82, 63–79. doi:10.3758/s13414-019-01827-z
6.
BenjaminD. J.BergerJ. O.JohannessonM.NosekB. A.WagenmakersE.-J.BerkR.. . . JohnsonV. E. (2018). Redefine statistical significance. Nature Human Behaviour, 2, 6–10. doi:10.1038/s41562-017-0189-z
7.
BradyT. F.AlvarezG. A. (2011). Hierarchical encoding in visual working memory: Ensemble statistics bias memory for individual items. Psychological Science, 22, 384–392. doi:10.1177/0956797610397956
8.
BrainardD. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436. doi:10.1163/156856897X00357
9.
CarrascoM. (2011). Visual attention: The past 25 years. Vision Research, 51, 1484–1525. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2011.04.012
10.
CarrascoM.BarbotA. (2019). Spatial attention alters appearance. Current Opinion in Psychology, 29, 56–64. doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.10.010
11.
ChaO.ChongS. C. (2018). Perceived average orientation reflects effective gist of the surface. Psychological Science, 29, 319–327. doi:10.1177/095679761773553
12.
ChongS. C.JooS. J.EmmanouilT. A.TreismanA. (2008). Statistical processing: Not so implausible after all. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 1327–1334. doi:10.3758/PP.70.7.1327
ChongS. C.TreismanA. (2005). Attentional spread in the statistical processing of visual displays. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 1–13. doi:10.3758/BF03195009
15.
De FockertJ. W.MarchantA. P. (2008). Attention modulates set representation by statistical properties. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 789–794. doi:10.3758/PP.70.5.789
16.
GobellJ.CarrascoM. (2005). Attention alters the appearance of spatial frequency and gap size. Psychological Science, 16, 644–651. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01588.x
17.
HabermanJ.WhitneyD. (2007). Rapid extraction of mean emotion and gender from sets of faces. Current Biology, 17, R751–R753. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2007.06.039
18.
Hubert-WallanderB.BoyntonG. M. (2015). Not all summary statistics are made equal: Evidence from extracting summaries across time. Journal of Vision, 15(4), Article 5. doi:10.1167/15.4.5
19.
ImH. Y.ChongS. C. (2009). Computation of mean size is based on perceived size. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71, 375–384. doi:10.3758/APP.71.2.375
20.
ImH. Y.ParkW. J.ChongS. C. (2015). Ensemble statistics as units of selection. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27, 114–127. doi:10.1080/20445911.2014.985301
21.
JASP Team. (2017). JASP (Version 0.10) [Computer software]. Retrieved from https://jasp-stats.org/
22.
JeffreysH. (1961). The theory of probability (3rd ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
23.
KanayaS.HayashiM. J.WhitneyD. (2018). Exaggerated groups: Amplification in ensemble coding of temporal and spatial features. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 285(1879), Article 20172770. doi:10.1098/rspb.2017.2770
24.
KirschW.HeitlingB.KundeW. (2018). Changes in the size of attentional focus modulate the apparent object’s size. Vision Research, 153, 82–90. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2018.10.004
25.
KleinerM.BrainardD. H.PelliD. G. (2007). What’s new in Psychtoolbox-3?Perception, 36(ECVP Abstract Suppl.).
26.
LeeH.BaekJ.ChongS. C. (2016). Perceived magnitude of visual displays: Area, numerosity, and mean size. Journal of Vision, 16(3), Article 12. doi:10.1167/16.3.12
27.
LiK. A.YehS. L. (2017). Mean size estimation yields left-side bias: Role of attention on perceptual averaging. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79, 2538–2551. doi:10.3758/s13414-017-1409-3
MyczekK.SimonsD. J. (2008). Better than average: Alternatives to statistical summary representations for rapid judgments of average size. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 772–788. doi:10.3758/PP.70.5.772
30.
PalmerJ. (1990). Attentional limits on the perception and memory of visual information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 332–350. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.16.2.332
31.
ParkesL.LundJ.AngelucciA.SolomonJ. A.MorganM. (2001). Compulsory averaging of crowded orientation signals in human vision. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 739–744. doi:10.1038/89532
32.
PelliD. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437–442. doi:10.1163/156856897X00366
33.
PersuhM.GenzerB.MelaraR. (2012). Iconic memory requires attention. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, Article 126. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00126
34.
ProulxM. J. (2010). Size matters: Large objects capture attention in visual search. PLOS ONE, 5(12), Article e15293. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0015293
35.
Rodriguez-CintronL. M.WrightC. E.ChubbC.SperlingG. (2019). How can observers use perceived size? Centroid versus mean-size judgments. Journal of Vision, 19(3), Article 3. doi:10.1167/19.3.3
36.
SonG.OhB.-I.KangM.-S.ChongS. C. (2020). Similarity-based clusters are representational units of visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46, 46–59. doi:10.1037/xlm0000722
37.
SouzaA. S.OberauerK. (2016). In search of the focus of attention in working memory: 13 years of the retro-cue effect. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78, 1839–1860. doi:10.3758/s13414-016-1108-5
38.
SweenyT. D.HarozS.WhitneyD. (2013). Perceiving group behavior: Sensitive ensemble coding mechanisms for biological motion of human crowds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 329–337. doi:10.1037/a0028712
39.
TeghtsoonianM. (1965). The judgment of size. The American Journal of Psychology, 78, 392–402. doi:10.2307/1420573
40.
WagenmakersE.-J.MarsmanM.JamilT.LyA.VerhagenJ.LoveJ.. . . MoreyR. D. (2018). Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I: Theoretical advantages and practical ramifications. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25, 35–57. doi:10.3758/s13423-017-1343-3
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.
