» Articles » PMID: 11848597

To See and Remember: Visually Specific Information is Retained in Memory from Previously Attended Objects in Natural Scenes

Overview
Specialty Psychology
Date 2002 Feb 19
PMID 11848597
Citations 54
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

What is the nature of the representation formed during the viewing of natural scenes? We tested two competing hypotheses regarding the accumulation of visual information during scene viewing. The first holds that coherent visual representations disintegrate as soon as attention is withdrawn from an object and thus that the visual representation of a scene is exceedingly impoverished. The second holds that visual representations do not necessarily decay upon the withdrawal of attention, but instead can be accumulated in memory from previously attended regions. Target objects in line drawings of natural scenes were changed during a saccadic eye movement away from those objects. Three findings support the second hypothesis. First, changes to the visual form of target objects (token substitution) were successfully detected, as indicated by both explicit and implicit measures, even though the target object was not attended when the change occurred. Second, these detections were often delayed until well after the change. Third, changes to semantically inconsistent target objects were detected better than changes to semantically consistent objects.

Citing Articles

Infants can use temporary or scant categorical information to individuate objects.

Lin Y, Stavans M, Li X, Baillargeon R Cogn Psychol. 2024; 149:101640.

PMID: 38412626 PMC: 11113335. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2024.101640.


Frontal lobe epilepsy: an eye tracking study of memory and attention.

Zhang Q, Sun W, Huang K, Qin L, Wen S, Long X Front Neurosci. 2023; 17:1298468.

PMID: 38116071 PMC: 10728291. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2023.1298468.


Relative contributions of oculomotor capture and disengagement to distractor-related dwell times in visual search.

Stefani M, Sauter M Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):16676.

PMID: 37794059 PMC: 10551035. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-43604-x.


Six ways of failing to see (and why the differences matter).

Nartker M, Firestone C, Egeth H, Phillips I Iperception. 2023; 14(5):20416695231198762.

PMID: 37781486 PMC: 10536858. DOI: 10.1177/20416695231198762.


Longer looks for language: Novel labels lengthen fixation duration for 2-year-old children.

LaTourrette A, Novack M, Waxman S J Exp Child Psychol. 2023; 236:105754.

PMID: 37544069 PMC: 10529313. DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2023.105754.


References
1.
Hoffman J, Subramaniam B . The role of visual attention in saccadic eye movements. Percept Psychophys. 1995; 57(6):787-95. DOI: 10.3758/bf03206794. View

2.
Biederman I . Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. Psychol Rev. 1987; 94(2):115-147. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.94.2.115. View

3.
Loftus G, MACKWORTH N . Cognitive determinants of fixation location during picture viewing. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1978; 4(4):565-72. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.4.4.565. View

4.
Antes J . The time course of picture viewing. J Exp Psychol. 1974; 103(1):62-70. DOI: 10.1037/h0036799. View

5.
Hayhoe M, Bensinger D, Ballard D . Task constraints in visual working memory. Vision Res. 1998; 38(1):125-37. DOI: 10.1016/s0042-6989(97)00116-8. View