Abstract
Many recent studies have concluded that the underlying units of visual attention are often discrete objects whose boundaries constrain the allocation of attention. However, relatively few studies have explored the particular stimulus cues that determine what counts as an “object” of attention. We explore this issue in the context of the two-rectangles stimuli previously used by many investigators. We first show, using both spatial-cuing and divided-attention paradigms, that same-object advantages occur even when the ends of the two rectangles are not drawn. This is consistent with previous reports that have emphasized the importance of individual contours in guiding attention, and our study shows that such effects can occur in displays that also contain grouping cues. In our divided-attention experiment, however, this contour-driven same-object advantage was significantly weaker than that obtained with the standard stimulus, with the added cue of closure—demonstrating that contour-based processes are not the whole story. These results confirm and extend the observation that same-object advantages can be observed even without full-fledged objects. At the same time, however, these studies show that boundary closure—one of the most important cues to objecthood per se—can directly influence attention. We conclude that object-based attention is not an all-or-nothing phenomenon; object-based effects can be independently strengthened or weakened by multiple cues to objecthood.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrams, R. A., &Law, M. B. (2000). Object-based visual attention with endogenous orienting.Perception & Psychophysics,62, 818–833.
Avrahami, J. (1999). Objects of attention, objects of perception.Perception & Psychophysics,61, 1604–1612.
Barenholtz, E., &Feldman, J. (2003). Perceptual comparisons within and between object parts: Evidence for a single-object superiority effect.Vision Research,43, 1655–1666.
Baylis, G., &Driver, J. (1993). Visual attention and objects: Evidence for hierarchical coding of location.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 451–470.
Behrmann, M., Zemel, R. S., &Mozer, M. C. (1998). Object-based attention and occlusion: Evidence from normal participants and a computational model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 1011–1036.
Behrmann, M., Zemel, R. S., &Mozer, M. C. (2000). Occlusion, symmetry, and object-based attention: Reply to Saiki (2000).Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 1497–1505.
Ben-Shahar, O., Scholl, B. J., & Zucker, S. (2003, May).Where objects come from: Attention, segmentation, and textons. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Vision Sciences Society, Sarasota, FL.
Ben-Shahar, O., Scholl, B. J., & Zucker, S. (2005).Bridging the gap between object-based attention and texton-based segmentation: How attention flows through orientation-defined textures. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Carey, S., &Xu, F. (2001). Infant knowledge of objects: Beyond object files and object tracking.Cognition,80, 179–213.
Cave, K. R., &Bichot, N. P. (1999). Visuospatial attention: Beyond a spotlight model.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,6, 204–223.
Cepeda, N. J., &Kramer, A. F. (1999). Strategic effects on objectbased attentional selection.Acta Psychologica,103, 1–19.
Chiang, W.-C., &Wynn, K. (2000). Infants’ representation and tracking of multiple objects.Cognition,77, 169–195.
Comtois, R. (2003). Vision Shell PPC [Computer software]. Cambridge, MA: Author.
Driver, J., Davis, G., Russell, C., Turatto, M., &Freeman, E. (2001). Segmentation, attention, and phenomenal visual objects.Cognition,80, 61–95.
Duncan, J. (1984). Selective attention and the organization of visual information.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,113, 501–517.
Egly, R., Driver, J., &Rafal, R. D. (1994). Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: Evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,123, 161–177.
Elder, J. [H.], &Zucker, S. [W.] (1993). The effect of contour closure on the rapid discrimination of two-dimensional shapes.Vision Research,33, 981–991.
Elder, J. H., &Zucker, S. W. (1998). Evidence for boundary-specific grouping.Vision Research,38, 143–152.
Goldsmith, M., &Yeari, M. (2003). Modulation of object-based attention by spatial focus under endogenous and exogenous orienting.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,29, 897–918.
He, X., Fan, S., Zhou, K., &Chen, L. (2004). Cue validity and objectbased attention.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,16, 1085–1097.
Koffka, K. (1935).Principles of gestalt psychology. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
Kovacs, I., &Julesz, B. (1993). A closed curve is much more than an incomplete one: Effect of closure in figure—ground discrimination.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,90, 7495–7497.
Kramer, A. F., &Jacobson, A. (1991). Perceptual organization and focused attention: The role of objects and proximity in visual processing.Perception & Psychophysics,50, 267–284.
Kramer, A. F., Weber, T. A., &Watson, S. E. (1997). Object-based attentional selection—Grouped arrays or spatially invariant representations?: Comment on Vecera and Farah (1994).Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,126, 3–13.
Lamy, D., &Egeth, H. (2002). Object-based selection: The role of attentional shifts.Perception & Psychophysics,64, 52–66.
Lamy, D., &Tsal, Y. (2000). Object features, object locations, and object files: Which does selective attention activate and when?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 1387–1400.
Lavie, N., &Driver, J. (1996). On the spatial extent of attention in objectbased visual selection.Perception & Psychophysics,58, 1238–1251.
Marrara, M. T., &Moore, C. M. (2003). Object-based selection in the two-rectangles method is not an artifact of the three-sided directional cue.Perception & Psychophysics,65, 1103–1109.
McCarley, J. S., Kramer, A. F., &Peterson, M. S. (2002). Overt and covert object-based attention.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,9, 751–758.
Moore, C., Yantis, S., &Vaughan, B. (1998). Object-based visual selection: Evidence from perceptual completion.Psychological Science,9, 104–110.
Pratt, J., &Sekuler, A. B. (2001). The effects of occlusion and past experience on the allocation of object-based attention.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,8, 721–727.
Rensink, R., & Cavanagh, P. (2003, May).Constraints on the rapid interpretation of cast shadows. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Vision Sciences Society, Sarasota, FL.
Reppa, I., &Leek, E. C. (2003). The modulation of inhibition of return by object-internal structure: Implications for theories of object-based attentional selection.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,10, 493–502.
Saarinen, J., &Levi, D. (1999). The effect of contour closure on shape perception.Spatial Vision,12, 227–238.
Saiki, J. (2000). Occlusion, symmetry, and object-based attention: Comments on Behrmann, Zemel, and Mozer (1998).Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 424–433.
Scholl, B. J. (2001). Objects and attention: The state of the art.Cognition,80, 1–46.
Scholl, B. J., &Leslie, A. M. (1999). Explaining the infant’s object concept: Beyond the perception/cognition dichotomy. In E. Lepore & Z. Pylyshyn (Eds.),What is cognitive science? (pp. 26–73). Oxford: Blackwell.
Scholl, B. J., Pylyshyn, Z. W., &Feldman, J. (2001). What is a visual object? Evidence from target merging in multiple-object tracking.Cognition,80, 159–177.
Shomstein, S., &Yantis, S. (2002). Object-based attention: Sensory modulation or priority setting?Perception & Psychophysics,64, 41–51.
Shomstein, S., &Yantis, S. (2004). Configural and contextual prioritization in object-based attention.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,11, 247–253.
Spehar, B. (2002). The role of contrast polarity in perceptual closure.Vision Research,42, 343–350.
vanMarle, K., &Scholl, B. J. (2003). Attentive tracking of objects versus substances.Psychological Science,14, 498–504.
Vecera, S. [P.] (1994). Grouped locations and object-based attention: Comment on Egly, Driver, and Rafal (1994).Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,123, 316–320.
Vecera, S. P., Behrmann, M., &Filapek, J. C. (2001). Attending to the parts of a single object: Part-based selection limitations.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 308–321.
Vecera, S. P., Behrmann, M., &McGoldrick, J. (2000). Selective attention to the parts of an object.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,7, 301–308.
Vecera, S. P., &Farah, M. J. (1994). Does visual attention select objects or locations?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,123, 146–160.
Watson, S. E., &Kramer, A. F. (1999). Object-based visual selective attention and perceptual organization.Perception & Psychophysics,61, 31–49.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Marino, A.C., Scholl, B.J. The role of closure in defining the “objects” of object-based attention. Perception & Psychophysics 67, 1140–1149 (2005). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193547
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193547