Goal-directed action is automatically biased towards looming motion

Vision Research

Volumn 113, Issue , 2015, Pages 188-197

  Moher, Jeff ^a   Sit, Jonathan ^a   Song, Joo Hyun ^a  

^a BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Looming motion; Movement trajectories; Selection bias; Visually guided action

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; FEMALE; GOAL ATTAINMENT; HAND MOVEMENT; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LOOMING MOTION; MALE; MENTAL TASK; MODULATION TRANSFER FUNCTION; MOTION; MOTIVATION; MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SELECTIVE ATTENTION; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL STIMULATION; YOUNG ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTENTION; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTENTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MOTION PERCEPTION; MOVEMENT; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84938286629     PISSN: 00426989     EISSN: 18785646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2014.08.005     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Adam J.J., Pratt J. Dissociating visual attention and effector selection in spatial precuing tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2004, 30(6):1092-1106. 10.1037/0096-1523.30.6.1092.
2. Brainard D.H. The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision 1997, 10(4):433-436.
3. Buetti S., Kerzel D. Conflicts during response selection affect response programming: Reactions toward the source of stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2009, 35(3):816-834. 10.1037/a0011092.
4. Castiello U. Mechanisms of selection for the control of hand action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 1999, 3:264-271.
5. Chao H. Top-down attentional control for distractor locations: The benefit of precuing distractor locations on target localization and discrimination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2010, 36(2):303-316.
6. Cisek P. Making decisions through a distributed consensus. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2012, 22(6):927-936. 10.1016/j.conb.2012.05.007.
7. Desmurget M., Jordan M., Prablanc C., Jeannerod M. Constrained and unconstrained movements involve different control strategies. Journal of Neurophysiology 1997, 77(3):1644-1650.
8. Egeth H.E., Virzi R.A., Garbart H. Searching for conjunctively defined targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1984, 10(1):32-39.
9. Franconeri S.L., Simons D.J. Moving and looming stimuli capture attention. Perception and Psychophysics 2003, 65(7):999-1010.
10. Gottlieb J. From thought to action: The parietal cortex as a bridge between perception, action, and cognition. Neuron 2007, 53(1):9-16. 10.1016/j.neuron.2006.12.009.
11. Green B.F., Anderson L.K. Color coding in a visual search task. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1956, 51(1):19-24. 10.1037/h0047484.
12. Kerzel D., Schönhammer J. Salient stimuli capture attention and action. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics 2013, 10.3758/s13414-013-0512-3.
13. Kitamura F., Matsunaga K., Nagao I. Influence of looking at hazard lights on car-driving performance. Perceptual and Motor Skills 1994, 78(3c):1059-1065.
14. Lin J.Y., Franconeri S., Enns J.T. Objects on a collision path with the observer demand attention. Psychological Science: A Journal of the American Psychological Society/APS 2008, 19(7):686-692. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02143.
15. Maris E., Oostenveld R. Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG- and MEG-data. Journal of Neuroscience Methods 2007, 164(1):177-190. 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.03.024.
16. Merchant H., Zarco W., Prado L., Pérez O. Behavioral and neurophysiological aspects of target interception. Advances in experimental medicine and biology 2009, Vol. 629:201-220. Springer, Boston, MA, US, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77064-2_10.
17. Moher J., Ashinoff B.K., Egeth H.E. Detection is unaffected by the deployment of focal attention. Frontiers in Cognitive Psychology 2013, 4(284):1-10.
18. Moher J., Egeth H.E. The ignoring paradox: Cueing distractor features leads first to selection, then to inhibition of to-be-ignored items. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics 2012, 74(8):1590-1605. 10.3758/s13414-012-0358-0.
19. Moher J., Song J.-H. Context-dependent sequential effects of target selection for action. Journal of Vision 2013, 13(8):1-13. 10.1167/13.8.10.
20. Moher J., Song J.-H. Target selection bias transfers across different response actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2014, 1-14. 10.1037/a0035739.
21. Pashler H. Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin 1994, 116(2):220-244.
22. Posner M. Orienting of attention. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1980, 32(1):3-25.
23. Schiff W., Caviness J.A., Gibson J.J. Persistent fear responses in rhesus monkeys to the optical stimulus of "looming". Science 1962, 136:982-983.
24. Schmuckler M.A., Collimore L.M., Dannemiller J.L. Infants' reactions to object collision on hit and miss trajectories. Infancy 2007, 12(1):105-118.
25. Simon J.R., Rudell A.P. Auditory S-R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology 1967, 51:300-304.
26. Skarratt P.A., Cole G.G., Gellatly A.R.H. Prioritization of looming and receding objects: Equal slopes, different intercepts. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics 2009, 71(4):964-970. 10.3758/APP.71.4.964.
27. Skarratt P.A., Gellatly A.R.H., Cole G.G., Pilling M., Hulleman J. Looming motion primes the visuomotor system. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2013, 1-14. 10.1037/a0034456.
28. Song J.-H., Nakayama K. Role of focal attention on latencies and trajectories of visually guided manual pointing. Journal of Vision 2006, 6(9):982-995. 10.1167/6.9.11.
29. Song J.-H., Nakayama K. Automatic adjustment of visuomotor readiness. Journal of Vision 2007, 7(5):1-9. 10.1167/7.5.2.
30. Song J.-H., Nakayama K. Fixation offset facilitates saccades and manual reaching for single but not multiple target displays. Experimental Brain Research 2007, 177(2):223-232. 10.1007/s00221-006-0667-4.
31. Song J.-H., Nakayama K. Target selection in visual search as revealed by movement trajectories. Vision Research 2008, 48(7):853-861.
32. Song J.-H., Nakayama K. Hidden cognitive states revealed in choice reaching tasks. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2009, 13(8):360-366.
33. Spivey M.J., Dale R. Continuous dynamics in real-time cognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2006, 15(5):207-211.
34. Spivey M.J., Grosjean M., Knoblich G. Continuous attraction toward phonological competitors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2005, 102(29):10393-10398.
35. Theeuwes J. Perceptual selectivity for color and form. Perception and Psychophysics 1992, 51(6):599-606.
36. Tipper S.P., Howard L.A., Jackson S.R. Selective reaching to grasp: Evidence for distractor interference effects. Visual Cognition 1997, 4:1-38.
37. Treisman A., Gelade G. A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology 1980, 12(1):97-136.
38. von Mühlenen A., Lleras A. No-onset looming motion guides spatial attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2007, 33(6):1297-1310. 10.1037/0096-1523.33.6.1297.
39. Watson D.G., Humphreys G.W. Visual marking: Prioritizing selection for new objects by top-down attentional inhibition of old objects. Psychological Review 1997, 104(1):90-122.
40. Wolfe J.M. Moving towards solutions to some enduring controversies in visual search. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2003, 7:70-76.
41. Wood D.K., Gallivan J.P., Chapman C.S., Milne J.L., Culham J.C., Goodale M.A. Visual salience dominates early visuomotor competition in reaching behavior. Journal of Vision 2011, 11(10):1-11. 10.1167/11.10.16.
42. Yantis S., Jonides J. Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Evidence from visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1984, 10(5):601-621.