TY - JOUR
T1 - Object individuation is invariant to attentional diffusion
T2 - Changes in the size of the attended region do not interact with object-substitution masking
AU - Goodhew, Stephanie C.
AU - Edwards, Mark
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016
PY - 2016/12/1
Y1 - 2016/12/1
N2 - When the human brain is confronted with complex and dynamic visual scenes, two pivotal processes are at play: visual attention (the process of selecting certain aspects of the scene for privileged processing) and object individuation (determining what information belongs to a continuing object over time versus what represents two or more distinct objects). Here we examined whether these processes are independent or whether they interact. Object-substitution masking (OSM) has been used as a tool to examine such questions, however, there is controversy surrounding whether OSM reflects object individuation versus substitution processes. The object-individuation account is agnostic regarding the role of attention, whereas object-substitution theory stipulates a pivotal role for attention. There have been attempts to investigate the role of attention in OSM, but they have been subject to alternative explanations. Here, therefore, we manipulated the size of the attended region, a pure and uncontaminated attentional manipulation, and examined the impact on OSM. Across three experiments, there was no interaction. This refutes the object-substitution theory of OSM. This, in turn, tell us that object-individuation is invariant the distribution of attention.
AB - When the human brain is confronted with complex and dynamic visual scenes, two pivotal processes are at play: visual attention (the process of selecting certain aspects of the scene for privileged processing) and object individuation (determining what information belongs to a continuing object over time versus what represents two or more distinct objects). Here we examined whether these processes are independent or whether they interact. Object-substitution masking (OSM) has been used as a tool to examine such questions, however, there is controversy surrounding whether OSM reflects object individuation versus substitution processes. The object-individuation account is agnostic regarding the role of attention, whereas object-substitution theory stipulates a pivotal role for attention. There have been attempts to investigate the role of attention in OSM, but they have been subject to alternative explanations. Here, therefore, we manipulated the size of the attended region, a pure and uncontaminated attentional manipulation, and examined the impact on OSM. Across three experiments, there was no interaction. This refutes the object-substitution theory of OSM. This, in turn, tell us that object-individuation is invariant the distribution of attention.
KW - Attentional spotlight size
KW - Object individuation
KW - Object perception
KW - Object-substitution masking
KW - Visual attention
KW - Visual span
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84992015479&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.10.006
DO - 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.10.006
M3 - Article
SN - 0010-0277
VL - 157
SP - 358
EP - 364
JO - Cognition
JF - Cognition
ER -