Editorial: Beyond Space-Based or Feature-Based Selection: Mechanisms of Object-Based Attention

Vivian M. Ciaramitaro; Gene R. Stoner

摘要

Our senses are constantly bombarded by an overwhelming amount of information, yet, our brain has a limited computational capacity and can fully process only a small fraction of that information at any given time. By selectively attending to information we overcome this limited capacity, prioritizing the processing of behaviorally relevant sensory information to the detriment of behaviorally irrelevant sensory information. Mechanisms underlying attentional selection and the prioritization of select locations in space or select features, such as visual color or motion, have been investigated in considerable detail (e.g., Carrasco, 2011 ). Our perceptual experience, however, is not one of disjoint features at disparate spatial locations, but of unified representations, objects, which can serve as the goal of our actions. Relative to our understanding of space- and feature-based selection, much less is known regarding object-based selection (see Chen, 2012 for review). In object-based selection, the object is the unit of selection such that if one feature of an object is attended, other task irrelevant features of that object are also prioritized (e.g., Duncan, 1984 ; O'Craven et al., 1999 ). How object-based mechanisms might differ from other forms of feature-based selection is poorly understood. For example, in global feature-based attention, selecting a feature prioritizes processing of this feature across the visual field, irrespective of location (e.g., Boynton et al., 2006 ; Liu and Mance, 2011 ; reviewed in Treue and Martinez-Trujillo, 2007 ). The definition of a perceptual object has long been the focus of both philosophical and empirical inquiry. Our ability to perceive visual objects is present from early in development (e.g., Spelke, 1990 ; Leslie et al., 1998 offers a comparison of the object concept in development and object-based attention). Our perception of objects is, in part, based on mechanisms of perceptual grouping, such as Gestalt principles, and attention can be, in turn, influenced by this grouping (e.g., Harms and Bundesen, 1983 ; Driver and Baylis, 1989 ; Kramer and Jacobson, 1991 ; Baylis and Driver, 1992 ). One fundamental question is whether or not attention does automatically spread across all features and locations delineated by object boundaries. Given that the spreading of attention across an entire object may not always be optimal and may not be mandatory, another fundamental question is how subsets of an object might be prioritized and enhanced, while task-irrelevant subsets of an object might be suppressed. Whereas, some studies have considered a more “pure” form of object-based selection, trying to control for the confounds of space- or feature-based selection (e.g., Mitchell et al., 2003 , 2004 ; Ciaramitaro et al., 2011 ), other studies have focused on how space- or feature-based selection are constrained by objecthood (e.g., Shomstein and Yantis, 2004 ; Shomstein and Behrmann, 2008 ). Several of the contributions to our research topic consider the diverse factors that can influence the allocation of attention within and between visual objects. Spatial uncertainty can play a role in re-allocating spatial attention within object boundaries. To decouple the influence of space- and object-based attention, Drummond and Shomstein present a cue with either high or low certainty within an object and sample behavior at several time points following cue presentation. They find that as spatial uncertainty decreases, spatial information guides selection and objects are filtered out. Reward history can also determine the allocation of attention. Sali et al. find that inconsistent vs. consistent rewarding based on a feature, such as color, can bias which of multiple objects are attended. Behavioral relevance also plays a role. Lim and Sinnett study attention set , a proxy for behavioral relevance, and find that the influence of a peripheral cue on a central task varies depending on whether peripheral cues and central targets contain objects from the same category or shared features. Hierarchical internal representation of a visual object may also influence how attention is allocated to an object. Valdés-Sosa et al. find that attention may act at different levels of the object hierarchy and that spatial frequency information structures the organization of object hierarchy. Another key element is that of perceptual grouping . Freeman et al. focus on the fate of task-irrelevant features when perceptually grouped as belonging to an object vs. ungrouped. They find that neuronal mechanisms of object-based attention, as assessed by fMRI, are not purely facilitatory and do not automatically spread across hemifields for objects delineated via perceptual grouping. They argue that suppression of task-irrelevant stimuli may depend on how effectively they compete with task-relevant stimuli, with greater competition when relevant and irrelevant features or locations belong to the same object. Two o

机译：大量信息不断轰炸我们的感官，但我们的大脑计算能力有限，并且在任何给定时间只能完全处理该信息的一小部分。通过选择性地关注信息，我们克服了这种有限的能力，将对行为相关的感官信息的处理优先于对与行为无关的感官信息的损害。注意力选择的机制以及对空间中选定位置或选定特征（例如视觉颜色或运动）的优先级排序的机制已经进行了相当详细的研究（例如Carrasco，2011）。但是，我们的感知体验并不是在不同的空间位置处的分离特征之一，而是统一的表示形式，对象，它们可以作为我们行动的目标。相对于我们对基于空间和基于特征的选择的了解，关于基于对象的选择知之甚少（有关评论，请参见Chen，2012）。在基于对象的选择中，对象是选择的单位，因此，如果某个对象的一个特征得到关注，则该对象的其他与任务无关的特征也会被优先处理（例如Duncan，1984; O'Craven等，1999）。。人们很少了解基于对象的机制与基于特征的选择的其他形式的区别。例如，在基于全局特征的关注中，选择特征会优先考虑在整个视野中对该特征的处理，而不论其位置如何（例如，Boynton等人，2006; Liu和Mance，2011;在Treue和Martinez-Trujillo中进行了评论， 2007）。知觉对象的定义一直以来都是哲学和实证研究的焦点。我们从视觉发展的早期就已经具备了感知视觉对象的能力（例如，Spelke，1990; Leslie等，1998提供了在发展中的对象概念和基于对象的注意力的比较）。我们对物体的感知部分是基于感知分组的机制，如格式塔原理，而注意力又会受到分组的影响（例如Harms和Bundesen，1983; Driver和Baylis，1989; Kramer和Jacobson，1991; Baylis and Driver，1992）。一个基本问题是注意力是否会自动分散到对象边界所描绘的所有特征和位置上。考虑到注意力在整个对象上的分散可能并不总是最佳的，也可能不是强制性的，另一个基本问题是如何优先考虑和增强对象的子集，同时抑制与任务无关的子集。鉴于一些研究认为基于对象的选择更为“纯净”，试图控制基于空间或基于特征的选择的复杂性（例如Mitchell等人，2003年，2004年; Ciaramitaro等人，2011年）），其他研究则集中在基于空间或基于特征的选择如何受对象限制的限制（例如，Shomstein和Yantis，2004; Shomstein和Behrmann，2008）。对我们研究主题的一些贡献考虑了可能影响视觉对象内部和之间的注意力分配的各种因素。空间不确定性可以在对象边界内重新分配空间注意力方面发挥作用。为了消除基于空间和基于对象的注意力的影响，Drummond和Shomstein提出了一种在对象内具有高确定性或低确定性的提示，并在提示提示后的多个时间点采样了行为。他们发现，随着空间不确定性的降低，空间信息将指导选择并过滤掉对象。奖励历史还可以确定注意力的分配。 Sali等。发现基于某种功能（例如颜色）的不一致奖励与一致奖励会偏重于参与多个对象中的哪个。行为相关性也起作用。 Lim和Sinnett研究了注意集（行为相关性的代名词），发现外围提示对中心任务的影响取决于外围提示和中心目标是否包含相同类别或共享特征的对象。视觉对象的分层内部表示形式也可能会影响如何将注意力分配给对象。 Valdés-Sosa等。发现注意力可能作用于对象层次结构的不同级别，并且空间频率信息构成了对象层次结构的组织。另一个关键要素是感知分组。 Freeman等。在感知上归类为属于对象与未归类时，重点关注与任务无关的功能的命运。他们发现，通过功能磁共振成像评估的基于对象的注意力的神经元机制并非纯粹是促进因素，并且对于通过知觉分组描绘的对象，不会自动在半场中传播。他们认为，抑制与任务无关的刺激可能取决于他们与与任务相关的刺激竞争的效率，而当相关和无关的特征或位置属于同一个对象时，竞争就越激烈。两点

Editorial: Beyond Space-Based or Feature-Based Selection: Mechanisms of Object-Based Attention

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅