Abstract
Research has shown that there are at least two kinds of visual selective attention: location based and object based. In the present study, we sought to determine the locus of spatially invariant object-based selection using a dual-task paradigm. In four experiments, observers performed an attention task (object feature report or visual search) with a concurrent memory task (object memory or spatial memory). Object memory was interfered with more by a concurrent object-based attention task than by a concurrent location-based attention task. However, this interference pattern was reversed for spatial memory, with greater interference by a location-based attention task than by an object-based attention task. These findings suggest that object-based attention and locationbased attention are functionally dissociable and that some forms of object-based selection operate within visual short-term memory.
Article PDF
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Alvarez, G. A., & Cavanagh, P. (2004). The capacity of visual shortterm memory is set both by information load and by number of objects. Psychological Science, 15, 106–111.
Attneave, F., & Arnoult, M. D. (1956). The quantitative study of shape and pattern perception. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 452–471.
Awh, E., Barton, B., & Vogel, E. K. (2007). Visual working memory represents a fixed number of items regardless of complexity. Psychological Science, 18, 622–628.
Awh, E., Dhaliwal, H., Christensen, S., & Matsukura, M. (2001). Evidence for two components of object-based selection. Psychological Science, 12, 329–334.
Awh, E., Jonides, J., & Reuter-Lorenz, P. A. (1998). Rehearsal in spatial working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 780–790.
Barnes, L. L., Nelson, J. K., & Reuter-Lorenz, P. A. (2001). Object-based attention and object-based working memory: Overlapping processes revealed by selective interference effects in humans. In C. Casanova & M. Ptito (Eds.), Progress in brain research (Vol. 134, pp. 471–481). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Baylis, G. C., & Driver, J. (1993). Visual attention and objects: Evidence for hierarchical coding of location. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 19, 451–470.
Besner, D., Davies, J., & Daniels, S. (1981). Reading for meaning: The effects of concurrent articulation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 415–437.
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.
Gajewski, D. A., & Brockmole, J. R. (2006). Feature bindings endure without attention: Evidence from an explicit recall task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 581–587.
Gibson, B. S. (1994). Visual attention and objects: One versus two or convex versus concave? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 203–207.
Griffin, I. C., & Nobre, A. C. (2003). Orienting attention to locations in internal representations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 1176–1194.
Hollingworth, A., Richard, A. M., & Luck, S. J. (2008). Understanding the function of visual short-term memory: Transsaccadic memory, object correspondence, and gaze correction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 163–181.
Irwin, D. E. (1992). Memory for position and identity across eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 307–317.
Irwin, D. E., & Andrews, R. V. (1996). Integration and accumulation of information across saccadic eye movements. In T. Inui & J. L. McClelland (Eds.), Attention and performance XVI: Information integration in perception and communication (pp. 125–155). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
Lee, H., & Vecera, S. P. (2005). Visual cognition influences early vision: The role of visual short-term memory in amodal completion. Psychological Science, 16, 763–768.
Loftus, G. R., & Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 476–490.
Luck, S. J., & Vogel, E. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390, 279–281.
Macmillan, N. A., & Creelman, C. D. (2005). Detection theory: A user’s guide (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Matsukura, M., Luck, S. J., & Vecera, S. P. (2007). Attention effects during visual short-term memory maintenance: Protection or prioritization? Perception & Psychophysics, 69, 1422–1434.
Oh, S.-H., & Kim, M.-S. (2004). The role of spatial working memory in visual search efficiency. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 275–281.
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. (1997). Grouped arrays versus object-based representations: Reply to Kramer et al. (1997). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 14–18.
Vecera, S. P., & Farah, M. J. (1994). Does visual attention select objects or locations? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 146–160.
Vogel, E. K., Woodman, G. F., & Luck, S. J. (2001). Storage of features, conjunctions, and objects in visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 27, 92–114.
Woodman, G. F., & Luck, S. J. (2004). Visual search is slowed when visuospatial working memory is occupied. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 269–274.
Woodman, G. F., Vogel, E. K., & Luck, S. J. (2001). Visual search remains efficient when visual working memory is full. Psychological Science, 12, 219–224.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Matsukura, M., Vecera, S.P. Interference between object-based attention and object-based memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 16, 529–536 (2009). https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.3.529
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.3.529