» Articles » PMID: 20016829

Culture Modulates Eye-movements to Visual Novelty

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2009 Dec 18
PMID 20016829
Citations 18
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: When viewing complex scenes, East Asians attend more to contexts whereas Westerners attend more to objects, reflecting cultural differences in holistic and analytic visual processing styles respectively. This eye-tracking study investigated more specific mechanisms and the robustness of these cultural biases in visual processing when salient changes in the objects and backgrounds occur in complex pictures.

Methodology/principal Findings: Chinese Singaporean (East Asian) and Caucasian US (Western) participants passively viewed pictures containing selectively changing objects and background scenes that strongly captured participants' attention in a data-driven manner. We found that although participants from both groups responded to object changes in the pictures, there was still evidence for cultural divergence in eye-movements. The number of object fixations in the US participants was more affected by object change than in the Singapore participants. Additionally, despite the picture manipulations, US participants consistently maintained longer durations for both object and background fixations, with eye-movements that generally remained within the focal objects. In contrast, Singapore participants had shorter fixation durations with eye-movements that alternated more between objects and backgrounds.

Conclusions/significance: The results demonstrate a robust cultural bias in visual processing even when external stimuli draw attention in an opposite manner to the cultural bias. These findings also extend previous studies by revealing more specific, but consistent, effects of culture on the different aspects of visual attention as measured by fixation duration, number of fixations, and saccades between objects and backgrounds.

Citing Articles

Does culture moderate the encoding and recognition of negative cues? Evidence from an eye-tracking study.

Falon S, Jobson L, Liddell B PLoS One. 2024; 19(4):e0295301.

PMID: 38630733 PMC: 11023573. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0295301.


Visual Attention to Novel Products - Cross-Cultural Insights From Physiological Data.

Rinklin I, Hubert M, Koller M, Kenning P Front Psychol. 2022; 13:840862.

PMID: 36160534 PMC: 9496519. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.840862.


The Effects of Ethnically Congruent Music on Eye Movements and Food Choice-A Cross-Cultural Comparison between Danish and Chinese Consumers.

Peng-Li D, Chan R, Byrne D, Janice Wang Q Foods. 2020; 9(8).

PMID: 32806790 PMC: 7466238. DOI: 10.3390/foods9081109.


Culture-Related and Individual Differences in Regional Brain Volumes: A Cross-Cultural Voxel-Based Morphometry Study.

Huang C, Doole R, Wu C, Huang H, Chao Y Front Hum Neurosci. 2019; 13:313.

PMID: 31551740 PMC: 6746838. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2019.00313.


Picture Novelty Influences Response Selection and Inhibition: The Role of the In-Group Bias and Task-Difficulty.

Zinchenko A, Mahmud W, Alam M, Kabir N, Al-Amin M PLoS One. 2016; 11(10):e0165470.

PMID: 27788213 PMC: 5082877. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165470.


References
1.
Nisbett R, Masuda T . Culture and point of view. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003; 100(19):11163-70. PMC: 196945. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1934527100. View

2.
Itti L, Koch C . Computational modelling of visual attention. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2001; 2(3):194-203. DOI: 10.1038/35058500. View

3.
Yi D, Kelley T, Marois R, Chun M . Attentional modulation of repetition attenuation is anatomically dissociable for scenes and faces. Brain Res. 2006; 1080(1):53-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.01.090. View

4.
Henderson J, Hollingworth A . High-level scene perception. Annu Rev Psychol. 1999; 50:243-71. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.243. View

5.
Prinzmetal W, McCool C, Park S . Attention: reaction time and accuracy reveal different mechanisms. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2005; 134(1):73-92. DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.134.1.73. View