The Impact of Reward Object on Object-Based Attention.

Reward has been shown to influence selective attention, yet previous research has primarily focused on rewards associated with specific locations or features, with limited investigation into the impact of a reward object on object-based attention (OBA). Therefore, it remains unclear whether objects previously associated with rewards affect OBA. To address this issue, we conducted two experiments using a paradigm that combined a reward training phase with a modified two-rectangle paradigm. The results indicate that a reward object modulates both space-based attention (SBA) and OBA. When cues appear on a reward object, the effects of both SBA and OBA are amplified compared to when cues appear on a no-reward object. This finding supports the value-driven attentional capture (VDAC) theory, which suggests that a reward object gain enhanced saliency to capture attention, thereby providing a theoretical support for the treatment of conditions such as drug addiction.

Different patterns of foreground and background processing contribute to texture segregation in humans: an electrophysiological study.

Background: Figure-ground segregation is a necessary process for accurate visual recognition. Previous neurophysiological and human brain imaging studies have suggested that foreground-background segregation relies on both enhanced foreground representation and suppressed background representation. However, in humans, it is not known when and how foreground and background processing play a role in texture segregation. Methods: To answer this question, it is crucial to extract and dissociate the neural signals elicited by the foreground and background of a figure texture with high temporal resolution. Here, we combined an electroencephalogram (EEG) recording and a temporal response function (TRF) approach to specifically track the neural responses to the foreground and background of a figure texture from the overall EEG recordings in the luminance-tracking TRF. A uniform texture was included as a neutral condition. The texture segregation visual evoked potential (tsVEP) was calculated by subtracting the uniform TRF from the foreground and background TRFs, respectively, to index the specific segregation activity. Results: We found that the foreground and background of a figure texture were processed differently during texture segregation. In the posterior region of the brain, we found a negative component for the foreground tsVEP in the early stage of foreground-background segregation, and two negative components for the background tsVEP in the early and late stages. In the anterior region, we found a positive component for the foreground tsVEP in the late stage, and two positive components for the background tsVEP in the early and late stages of texture processing. Discussion: In this study we investigated the temporal profile of foreground and background processing during texture segregation in human participants at a high time resolution. The results demonstrated that the foreground and background jointly contribute to figure-ground segregation in both the early and late phases of texture processing. Our findings provide novel evidence for the neural correlates of foreground-background modulation during figure-ground segregation in humans.

The influence of perceptual load on gaze-induced attentional orienting: The modulation of expectation.

Humans tend to focus on others' gaze. Previous studies have shown that the gaze direction of others can induce corresponding attentional orienting. However, gaze cues have typically been presented alone in these studies. It is unclear how gaze cues induce observers' attention in complicated contexts with additional perceptual information. Therefore, the present study investigated gaze-induced attentional orienting at different levels of perceptual load. Results indicated that the attentional effect of the dynamic gaze cue (i.e., GCE: gaze cue effect) emerged under low perceptual load and disappeared under high perceptual load. The absence of GCE could not attribute to perceptual capacity exhaustion. Moreover, the influence of perceptual load on gaze-induced attentional orienting was modulated by individuals' expectation. Specifically, the GCE occurred under high perceptual load when the gaze cue was predictive (with individuals' expectation). These findings provide new evidence on the mode of gaze-induced attentional orienting under different perceptual load conditions.

Focused attention: its key role in gaze and arrow cues for determining where attention is directed.

Others' gaze direction and traffic arrow signal lights play significant roles in guiding observers' attention in daily life. Previous studies have shown that gaze and arrow cues can direct attention to the cued location. However, it is ambiguous where gaze and arrow cues guide attention: the cued location or a broader cued region. Therefore, the present study adopted a primary cue-target task and manipulated possible target locations to explore this issue. The results revealed that due to the different physical characteristics of non-predictive gaze and arrow cues, physically unfocused-pointing gaze cues guided attention to a broader cued region, whereas focused-pointing arrow cues guided attention to the exact cued location. Furthermore, gaze cues could also direct attention to the exact cued location when observers' attention was focused in a top-down manner (with highly predictive probability). These findings suggest that where gaze and arrow cues direct attention depends on whether observers' attention is focused by the cues, either in a bottom-up or top-down manner. Accordingly, a preliminary framework called the "Focused-Diffused Attentional Orienting Model" is proposed to explain how gaze and arrow cues direct humans' attention. The present study enhances our understanding of human attentional orienting systems from a behavioral perspective.

Are you looking at me? Impact of eye contact on object-based attention.

Eye contact plays an important role in social interaction and can capture and hold attention. However, it is unclear whether and how objects that can also guide attentional allocation interact with eye contact in guiding attention. Therefore, the current study adapted a well-established two-rectangle paradigm and used faces depicting different gaze directions (direct and averted) or rectangles overlaid with eyes as stimuli. In Experiment 1, we simultaneously presented two faces (one direct gaze, one averted gaze) to participants, manipulating cue location (direct-gaze face, averted-gaze face). The results revealed a larger object-based effect when the cue appeared on the direct-gaze face compared to the averted-gaze face. In Experiment 2, inverted faces were presented, and the results mirrored those of Experiment 1. Interestingly, rectangles overlaid with eyes were presented in Experiment 3, and the results showed that the object-based effect was larger when the cue appeared on the direct-gaze rectangle compared to the averted-gaze rectangle. These findings suggest that eye contact can interact with objects in guiding attention and that this effect is not reliant on the presence of the face. Our results can support attentional prioritization theory and may provide a new approach for diagnosing social-cognitive impairments. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

The modulation of object-based attentional selection by facial expressions.

Human beings can show preferentially attentional bias to different facial expressions. However, it is unclear whether the modulation of selective attention by facial expressions is based on the face itself (object-based attention) or its location (space-based attention). This study aimed to test this problem by using faces with different emotional valences in the two-rectangle paradigm across three experiments. We found that there was no significant difference in space-based effect among the positive, neutral, and negative conditions. However, the object-based effect was larger for the negative condition than for the neutral and positive ones, because of its slower reaction times for the invalid different-object trials. The results indicated that the object-based attentional selection was modulated by facial expressions, and that faces expressing negative emotions hamper the disengagement of attention from the whole object (i.e., the face), instead of the certain location. Our study can further add support to the attentional prioritisation hypothesis over attentional spreading hypothesis.