Limits...
Fast and Conspicuous? Quantifying Salience With the Theory of Visual Attention.

Krüger A, Tünnermann J, Scharlau I - Adv Cogn Psychol (2016)

Bottom Line: Only a few studies systematically related salience effects to a common salience measure, and they are partly outdated in the light of new findings on the time course of salience effects.With this procedure, TVA becomes applicable to a broad range of salience-related stimulus material.A 4th experiment substantiates its applicability to the luminance dimension.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Paderborn University.

ABSTRACT
Particular differences between an object and its surrounding cause salience, guide attention, and improve performance in various tasks. While much research has been dedicated to identifying which feature dimensions contribute to salience, much less regard has been paid to the quantitative strength of the salience caused by feature differences. Only a few studies systematically related salience effects to a common salience measure, and they are partly outdated in the light of new findings on the time course of salience effects. We propose Bundesen's Theory of Visual Attention (TVA) as a theoretical basis for measuring salience and introduce an empirical and modeling approach to link this theory to data retrieved from temporal-order judgments. With this procedure, TVA becomes applicable to a broad range of salience-related stimulus material. Three experiments with orientation pop-out displays demonstrate the feasibility of the method. A 4th experiment substantiates its applicability to the luminance dimension.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Estimated attentional weights (ω) for the probe stimuli of Experiment 2,salience condition (ωsp = weight for the salient probe) inblue and neutral (ωnp = weight for the neutral probe) in red.The weights for the reference stimuli are 1 minus the weight of therespective probe.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4862317&req=5

Figure 9: Estimated attentional weights (ω) for the probe stimuli of Experiment 2,salience condition (ωsp = weight for the salient probe) inblue and neutral (ωnp = weight for the neutral probe) in red.The weights for the reference stimuli are 1 minus the weight of therespective probe.

Mentions: The attentional weights on the group level are, again, most informative aboutwhether attention was deployed unequally. In contrast to Experiment 1, theattentional weight for the probe in the salience condition, ωspclean = .393, clearly differed from the equal weight distribution, asshown in Figure 9. As in Experiment 1, theattentional weight ωnp = .526 in the neutral condition deviatedfrom the balanced value of.5. We suppose this deviation to be a consequence ofthe timing which differed for probe and reference stimulus. The weight in thesalience condition was again corrected (uncorrected ωsp =.423), such that the small shift in weight likely due to timing does not affectthe measurement of salience. The processing rate for the salientυsp = 23.4 Hz was lower than the processing speed for theneutral condition υnp = 31.6 Hz (see Figure 10 for their distributions). The processingcapacity, as shown in Figure 11, wasconstant over the conditions which allowed the comparison of weights acrossconditions. The comparison of the judgment data and the posterior predictive inFigure 8 shows that the model is ableto fit the data and provides a reasonable description for them.


Fast and Conspicuous? Quantifying Salience With the Theory of Visual Attention.

Krüger A, Tünnermann J, Scharlau I - Adv Cogn Psychol (2016)

Estimated attentional weights (ω) for the probe stimuli of Experiment 2,salience condition (ωsp = weight for the salient probe) inblue and neutral (ωnp = weight for the neutral probe) in red.The weights for the reference stimuli are 1 minus the weight of therespective probe.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4862317&req=5

Figure 9: Estimated attentional weights (ω) for the probe stimuli of Experiment 2,salience condition (ωsp = weight for the salient probe) inblue and neutral (ωnp = weight for the neutral probe) in red.The weights for the reference stimuli are 1 minus the weight of therespective probe.
Mentions: The attentional weights on the group level are, again, most informative aboutwhether attention was deployed unequally. In contrast to Experiment 1, theattentional weight for the probe in the salience condition, ωspclean = .393, clearly differed from the equal weight distribution, asshown in Figure 9. As in Experiment 1, theattentional weight ωnp = .526 in the neutral condition deviatedfrom the balanced value of.5. We suppose this deviation to be a consequence ofthe timing which differed for probe and reference stimulus. The weight in thesalience condition was again corrected (uncorrected ωsp =.423), such that the small shift in weight likely due to timing does not affectthe measurement of salience. The processing rate for the salientυsp = 23.4 Hz was lower than the processing speed for theneutral condition υnp = 31.6 Hz (see Figure 10 for their distributions). The processingcapacity, as shown in Figure 11, wasconstant over the conditions which allowed the comparison of weights acrossconditions. The comparison of the judgment data and the posterior predictive inFigure 8 shows that the model is ableto fit the data and provides a reasonable description for them.

Bottom Line: Only a few studies systematically related salience effects to a common salience measure, and they are partly outdated in the light of new findings on the time course of salience effects.With this procedure, TVA becomes applicable to a broad range of salience-related stimulus material.A 4th experiment substantiates its applicability to the luminance dimension.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Paderborn University.

ABSTRACT
Particular differences between an object and its surrounding cause salience, guide attention, and improve performance in various tasks. While much research has been dedicated to identifying which feature dimensions contribute to salience, much less regard has been paid to the quantitative strength of the salience caused by feature differences. Only a few studies systematically related salience effects to a common salience measure, and they are partly outdated in the light of new findings on the time course of salience effects. We propose Bundesen's Theory of Visual Attention (TVA) as a theoretical basis for measuring salience and introduce an empirical and modeling approach to link this theory to data retrieved from temporal-order judgments. With this procedure, TVA becomes applicable to a broad range of salience-related stimulus material. Three experiments with orientation pop-out displays demonstrate the feasibility of the method. A 4th experiment substantiates its applicability to the luminance dimension.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus