When meaning matters: The temporal dynamics of semantic influences on visual attention

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 180-196

  De Groot, Floor ^a   Huettig, Falk ^b,c   Olivers, Christian N L ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHOLINGUISTICS   (Netherlands)

^c RADBOUD UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Eye movements; Psycholinguistics; Semantic memory; Visual attention; Visual search

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTENTION; EYE MOVEMENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; SEMANTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME FACTOR; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTENTION; EYE MOVEMENTS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; SEMANTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84956684213     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: 19391277     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/xhp0000102     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Awh, E., & Jonides, J. (2001). Overlapping mechanisms of attention and spatial working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5, 119-126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01593-X
2. Cousineau, D. (2005). Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson's method. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 1, 42-45.
3. Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87-114.
4. de Groot, F., Koelewijn, T., Huettig, F., & Olivers, C. N. L. (2014). A stimulus set of words and pictures matched for visual and semantic similarity. Manuscript submitted for publication.
5. Donderi, D. C., & McFadden, S. (2005). Compressed file length predicts search time and errors on visual displays. Displays, 26, 71-78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.displa.2005.02.002
6. Downing, P. E. (2000). Interactions between visual working memory and selective attention. Psychological Science, 11, 467-473. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00290
7. Duncan, J. (1983). Category effects in visual search: A failure to replicate the "oh-zero" phenomenon. Perception & Psychophysics, 34, 221-232. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03202949
8. Henderson, J. M., & Ferreira, F. (2004). Scene perception for psycholinguists. In J. M. Henderson & F. Ferreira (Eds.), The interface of language, vision, and action: Eye movements and the visual world (pp. 1-58). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
9. Henderson, J. M., Weeks, P. A., Jr., & Hollingworth, A. (1999). The effects of semantic consistency on eye movements during complex scene viewing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 210-228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.25.1.210
10. Huettig, F., & McQueen, J. M. (2007). The tug of war between phonological, semantic and shape information in language-mediated visual search. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 460-482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.02.001
11. Huettig, F., Olivers, C. N., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2011). Looking, language, and memory: Bridging research from the visual world and visual search paradigms. Acta Psychologica, 137, 138-150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.07.013
12. Huettig, F., Rommers, J., & Meyer, A. S. (2011). Using the visual world paradigm to study language processing: A review and critical evaluation. Acta Psychologica, 137, 151-171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.11.003
13. Hwang, A. D., Wang, H. C., & Pomplun, M. (2011). Semantic guidance of eye movements in real-world scenes. Vision Research, 51, 1192-1205. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2011.03.010
14. Itti, L., & Koch, C. (2001). Computational modelling of visual attention. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 194-203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/35058500
15. Jonides, J., & Gleitman, H. (1972). A conceptual category effect in visual search: O as letter or as digit. Perception & Psychophysics, 12, 457-460. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03210934
16. Keuleers, E., Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2010). SUBTLEX-NL: A new measure for Dutch word frequency based on film subtitles. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 643-650. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.3.643
17. Luck, S. J., & Vogel, E. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390, 279-281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/36846
18. Lupyan, G. (2008). The conceptual grouping effect: Categories matter (and named categories matter more). Cognition, 108, 566-577. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.03.009
19. Mathôt, S., Schreij, D., & Theeuwes, J. (2012). OpenSesame: An opensource, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 314-324. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0168-7
20. Meyer, A. S., Belke, E., Telling, A. L., & Humphreys, G. W. (2007). Early activation of object names in visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 710-716. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03196826
21. Moores, E., Laiti, L., & Chelazzi, L. (2003). Associative knowledge controls deployment of visual selective attention. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 182-189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nn996
22. Morey, R. D. (2008). Confidence intervals from normalized data: A correction to Cousineau (2005). reason, 4, 61-64.
23. Olivers, C. N. (2008). Interactions between visual working memory and visual attention. Frontiers in Bioscience, 13, 1182-1191. http://dx.doi.org/10.2741/2754
24. Olivers, C. N., Meijer, F., & Theeuwes, J. (2006). Feature-based memorydriven attentional capture: Visual working memory content affects visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 1243-1265. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.32.5.1243
25. Riesenhuber, M., & Poggio, T. (1999). Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 1019-1025. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/14819
26. Schroeder, C. E., Mehta, A. D., & Givre, S. J. (1998). A spatiotemporal profile of visual system activation revealed by current source density analysis in the awake macaque. Cerebral Cortex, 8, 575-592. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cercor/8.7.575
27. Soto, D., Heinke, D., Humphreys, G. W., & Blanco, M. J. (2005). Early, involuntary top-down guidance of attention from working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 248-261. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.31.2.248
28. Soto, D., Hodsoll, J., Rotshtein, P., & Humphreys, G. W. (2008). Automatic guidance of attention from working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 342-348. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.05.007
29. Soto, D., & Humphreys, G. W. (2007). Automatic guidance of visual attention from verbal working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 730-737. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.33.3.730
30. Telling, A. L., Kumar, S., Meyer, A. S., & Humphreys, G. W. (2010). Electrophysiological evidence of semantic interference in visual search. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 2212-2225.
31. Theeuwes, J. (2010). Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychologica, 135, 77-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.006
32. van Heuven, W. J., Mandera, P., Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2014). SUBTLEX-UK: A new and improved word frequency database for British English. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 1176-1190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.850521
33. van Zoest, W., Donk, M., & Theeuwes, J. (2004). The role of stimulusdriven and goal-driven control in saccadic visual selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 746-759. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.30.4.749
34. Võ, M. L., & Henderson, J. M. (2011). Object-scene inconsistencies do not capture gaze: Evidence from the flash-preview moving-window paradigm. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73, 1742-1753. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-011-0150-6
35. Vogel, E. K., & Machizawa, M. G. (2004). Neural activity predicts individual differences in visual working memory capacity. Nature, 428, 748-751. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature02447
36. Vogel, E. K., Woodman, G. F., & Luck, S. J. (2001). Storage of features, conjunctions, and objects in visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 92-114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.27.1.92
37. White, M. J. (1977). Identification and categorization in visual search. Memory & Cognition, 5, 648-657. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03197411
38. Wolfe, J. M. (2007). Guided search 4.0: Current progress with a model of visual search. In W. D. Gray (Ed.), Integrated models of cognitive systems (pp. 99-119). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195189193.003.0008
39. Wolfe, J. M., & Horowitz, T. S. (2004). What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, 495-501. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrn1411