Semantic consistency versus perceptual salience in visual scenes: Findings from change detection

Acta Psychologica

Volumn 142, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 168-176

  Spotorno, Sara ^a,b   Tatler, Benjamin W ^b   Faure, Sylvane ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENOA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITÉ CÔTE D'AZUR   (France)

Author keywords

2300 Human Experimental Psychology; 2323 Visual Perception; 2346 Attention; Change detection; Diagnosticity; Perceptual salience; Probability of occurrence; Semantic inconsistency

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS; VISION;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTENTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; REACTION TIME; RESEARCH DESIGN; SEMANTICS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 84872508698     PISSN: 00016918     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.12.009     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Aginsky V., Tarr M.J. How are different properties of a scene encoded in visual memory?. Visual Cognition 2000, 7:147-162.
2. Auvray M., O'Regan J.K. L'influence des facteurs sémantiques sur la cécité aux changements progressifs dans les scènes visuelles. L'Année Psychologique 2003, 103:9-32.
3. Becker M.W., Pashler H., Lubin J. Object intrinsic oddities draw early saccades. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 2007, 33:20-30.
4. Biederman I., Mezzanotte R.J., Rabinowitz J.C. Scene perception: Detecting and judging objects undergoing relational violations. Cognitive Psychology 1982, 14:143-177.
5. Bonitz V.S., Gordon R.D. Attention to smoking-related and incongruous objects during scene viewing. Acta Psychologica 2008, 129:255-263.
6. Bortolini U. Prove per la valutazione fonologica del linguaggio infantile 1995, Master, Padua.
7. Boyce S.J., Pollatsek A., Rayner K. Effect of background information on object identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1989, 9:411-429.
8. Brooks D.I., Rasmussen I.P., Hollingworth A. The nesting of search contexts within natural scenes: Evidence from contextual cuing. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 2010, 36:1406-1418.
9. Carmi R., Itti L. Visual causes versus correlates of attentional selection in dynamic scenes. Vision Research 2006, 46:4333-4345.
10. Castelhano M.S., Heaven C. Scene context influences without scene gist: Eye movements guided by spatial associations in visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2011, 18(5):890-896.
11. Cole G.G., Kentridge R.W., Gellatly A.R.H., Heywood C.A. Detectability of onsets versus offsets in the change detection paradigm. Journal of Vision 2003, 3:22-31.
12. Cole G.G., Kentridge R.W., Heywood C.A. Visual salience in the change detection paradigm: The special role of object onset. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 2004, 3:464-477.
13. Cole G.G., Liversedge S.P. Change blindness and the primacy of object appearance. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2006, 13(4):588-593.
14. Davenport J.L. Consistency effects between objects in scenes. Memory & Cognition 2007, 35:393-401.
15. Davenport J.L., Potter M.C. Scene consistency in object and background perception. Psychological Science 2004, 8:559-564.
16. De Graef P., Christiaens D., d'Ydewalle G. Perceptual effects of scene context on object identification. Psychological Research 1990, 52:317-329.
17. De Graef P., Lauwereyns J., Verfaillie K. Attentional orienting and scene semantics (Psyc.Rep.No.268) 2000, University of Leuven, Laboratory of Experimental Psychology, Leuven.
18. Einhäuser W., Spain M., Perona P. Objects predict fixations better than early saliency. Journal of Vision 2008, 8(14):1-26. (18).
19. Foulsham T., Underwood G. How does the purpose of inspection influence the potency of visual salience in scene perception?. Perception 2007, 36:1123-1138.
20. Foulsham T., Underwood G. Does conspicuity enhance distraction? Saliency and eye landing position when searching for objects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2009, 62(6):1088-1098.
21. Franconeri S.I., Hollingworth A., Simons D.J. Do new objects capture attention?. Psychological Science 2005, 16(4):275-281.
22. Friedman A. Framing pictures: The role of knowledge in automatized encoding and memory for gist. Journal of Experimental Psychology General 1979, 108(3):316-355.
23. Gareze L., Findlay J.M. Absence of scene context effects in object detection and eye gaze capture. Eye movements: A window on mind and brain 2007, 618-637. Elsevier, Amsterdam. R.P.G. van Gompel, M.H. Fischer, W.S. Murray, R.L. Hill (Eds.).
24. Gordon R. Attentional allocation during the perception of scenes. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance 2004, 30(4):760-777.
25. Gordon R. Selective attention during scene perception: Evidence from negative priming. Memory and Cognition 2006, 34:1484-1494.
26. Henderson J.M., Brockmole J.R., Castelhano M.S., Mack M. Visual saliency does not account for eye movements during visual search in real-world scenes. Eye movement research: Insights into mind and brain 2007, 537-562. Elsevier, Oxford. R. van Gompel, M. Fischer, W. Murray, R. Hill (Eds.).
27. Henderson J.M., Hollingworth A. High-level scene perception. Annual Review of Psychology 1999, 50:243-271.
28. Henderson J.M., Larson C.L., Zhu D.C. Full scenes produce more activation than close-up scenes and scene-diagnostic objects in parahippocampal and retrosplenial cortex: An fMRI study. Brain and Cognition 2008, 66:40-49.
29. Hollingworth A., Henderson J.M. Object identification is isolated from scene semantic constraint: Evidence from object type and token discrimination. Acta Psychologica: Special Issue on Visual Object Perception 1999, 102:319-343.
30. Hollingworth A., Henderson J.M. Semantic informativeness mediates the detection of changes in natural scenes. Visual Cognition 2000, 7:213-235.
31. Hollingworth A., Henderson J.M. Testing a conceptual locus for the inconsistent object change detection advantage in real-world scenes. Memory & Cognition 2003, 31(6):930-940.
32. Itti L. The iLab neuromorphic Vision C++ toolkit: Free tools for the next generation of vision algorithms. The Neuromorphic Engineer 2004, 1:10.
33. Itti L., Baldi P. Bayesian surprise attracts human attention. Vision Research 2009, 49(10):1295-1306.
34. Itti L., Koch C. A saliency-based search mechanism for overt and covert shifts of visual attention. Vision Research 2000, 40(10-12):1489-1506.
35. Joubert O.R., Rousselet G.A., Fize D., Fabre-Thorpe M. Processing scene context: Fast categorization and object interference. Vision Research 2007, 47(26):3286-3297.
36. Kelley T.A., Chun M.M., Chua K.P. Effects of scene inversion on change detection of targets matched for visual salience. Journal of Vision 2003, 2:1-5.
37. Kollmorgen S., Nortmann N., Schröder S., Köning P. Influence of low-level stimulus features, task dependent factors, and spatial biases on overt visual attention. PLoS Computational Biology 2010, 6(5):1-20.
38. Loftus G.R., Mackworth N.H. Cognitive determinants of fixation location during picture viewing. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance 1978, 4:565-572.
39. Lubow R.E., Tsal Y., Mirkin A., Mazliah G. English and Hebrew letter report by English- and Hebrew-reading subjects: Evidence for stimulus control, not hemispheric asymmetry. Brain and Cognition 1994, 25:34-51.
40. Mannan S.K., Ruddock K.H., Wooding D.S. Fixation sequences made during visual examination of briefly presented 2D images. Spatial Vision 1997, 11:157-178.
41. Melcher D. Accumulation and persistence of memory for natural scenes. Journal of Vision 2006, 6(1):8-17. (2).
42. Mondy S., Coltheart V. Detection and identification of change in naturalistic scenes. Visual Cognition 2000, 7:281-296.
43. Nyström M., Holmqvist K. Semantic override of low-level features in image viewing - Both initially and overall. Journal of Eye Movement Research 2008, 2(2):1-11.
44. O'Regan J.K., Deubel H., Clark J.J., Rensink R.A. Picture changes during blinks: Looking without seeing and seeing without looking. Visual Cognition 2000, 7(1/2/3):191-211.
45. Oliva A. Gist of the scene. Encyclopedia of neurobiology of attention 2005, 251-256. Elsevier, San Diego, CA. L. Itti, G. Rees, J.K. Tsotsos (Eds.).
46. Oliva A., Schyns P.G. Diagnostic colors mediate scene recognition. Cognitive Psychology 2000, 41:176-210.
47. Parkhurst D., Law K., Niebur E. Modeling the role of salience in the allocation of overt visual attention. Vision Research 2002, 42:107-123.
48. Pringle H.L., Irwin D.E., Kramer A.F., Atchley P. The role of attentional breadth in perceptual change detection. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 2001, 8:89-95.
49. Reinagel P., Zador A.M. Natural scene statistics at the center of gaze. Network: Computation in Neural Systems 1999, 10:1-10.
50. Rensink R.A. Change detection. Annual Review of Psychology 2002, 53:245-277.
51. 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. Psychological Science 1997, 8(5):268-373.
52. Rensink R.A., O'Regan J.K., Clark J.J. On the failure to detect changes in scenes across brief interruptions. Visual Cognition 2000, 7(1/2/3):127-145.
53. Sampanes A.C., Tseng P., Bridgeman B. The role of gist in scene recognition. Vision Research 2008, 48:2275-2283.
54. Schyns P.G. Diagnostic recognition: Tasks constraints, object information, and their interactions. Cognition 1998, 67:147-179.
55. Spotorno S., Faure S. Change detection in complex scenes: Hemispheric contribution and the role of perceptual and semantic factors. Perception 2011, 40:5-22.
56. Spotorno S., Faure S. The right hemisphere advantage in visual change detection depends on temporal factors. Brain and Cognition 2011, 77(3):365-371.
57. Spotorno S., Faure S. Linking hemispheric visuospatial functions to the awareness of visual change. Revue de Neuropsychologie 2011, 3(1):23-32.
58. Stigliani A., MacEvoy S., Epstein R.A. Diagnostic objects facilitate scene categorization. Journal of Vision 2011, 11(11):1109.
59. Stirk J.A., Underwood G. Low-level visual saliency does not predict change detection in natural scenes. Journal of Vision 2007, 7(10):1-10. (3).
60. Tatler B.W., Baddeley R.J., Gichrist I.D. Visual correlates of eye movements: Effects of scale and time. Vision Research 2005, 45(5):643-659.
61. Tatler B.W., Hayhoe M.M., Land M.F., Ballard D.H. Eye guidance in natural vision: Reinterpreting salience. Journal of Vision 2011, 11(5):1-23. (5).
62. Tatler B.W., Melcher D. Picture in mind: Initial encoding of object properties varies with the realism of the scene stimulus. Perception 2007, 36:1715-1729.
63. Theeuwes J. Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychologica 2010, 135:77-99.
64. Torralba A. Contextual priming for object detection. International Journal of Computer Vision 2003, 53(2):169-191.
65. Torralba A., Henderson J.M., Oliva A., Castelhano M. Contextual guidance of eye movements and attention in real-world scenes: The role of global features on object search. Psychological Review 2006, 113:766-786.
66. Underwood G., Foulsham T. Visual saliency and semantic incongruency influence eye movements when inspecting pictures. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2006, 59(11):1931-1949.
67. Underwood G., Templeman E., Lamming L., Foulsham T. Is attention necessary for object identification? Evidence from eye movements during the inspection of real-world scenes. Consciousness and Cognition 2008, 17:159-170.
68. Võ M.L.-H., Henderson J.M. Object-scene inconsistencies do not capture gaze: Evidence from the flash-preview moving-window paradigm. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2011, 73:1742-1753.
69. Yantis S., Gibson B.S. Object continuity in apparent motion and attention. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 1994, 48(2):182-204.