Flexible resource allocation and prediction in attentive tracking
Final Report Abstract
In everyday life, humans often have to keep track of multiple moving objects in parallel. When watching soccer on TV or when driving down a highway more than one object attracts human visual attention (e.g., players, cars, bikers, pedestrians). In this research project, we examined how the human visual system establishes stability of object selection during visual tracking. More specific, we have tested different parameters that are critical for remaining aware of the locations of moving objects. Most of the tested parameters pertained to how the objects moved and looked – such as object speed, average and minimum distances between objects, as well as objects’ color and form. For instance, we found that humans’ tracking performance depends on the stability of object speed. Remaining aware of objects’ locations becomes more difficult with an increasing number of objects that move at a variable speed. Surprisingly, this is even true if only the objects that can be ignored but not the objects that need to be followed move at a variable speed. This suggests that the dynamic changes in interobject spacing rather than the variable speed impairs tracking. The results of the experiments of this DFG project are surprising and counter-intuitive with respect to the human ability of keeping track of moving objects among other moving objects that can be ignored. One proposed experimental series was built on the gaze cue effect. This effect describes the phenomenon that human observers automatically direct their visual attention to the region where other people are looking. We found that the human visual system could not process gaze cues in a dynamic tracking environment. Thus, this highly-reliable effect that is usually studied in static environments diminished when we tested it in a dynamic environment. Yet, this finding was a good starting point for the exploration of so-called top-down influences on visual tracking. We found that human observes can prioritize and/or ignore dynamic objects with specific properties. But they only do so in conditions with a specific task instruction and a corresponding test. These findings indicate that existing theories need to be adjusted to allow for flexible top-down, voluntary processing during tracking. A further surprising and important finding was that enviromental cues (i.e. the 3D environment) influence tracking performance. The same movements within a crowd of balls - some of which had to be followed while the rest could be ignored - led to a lower tracking performance if it seemed as if the balls moved under the ceiling instead of on the floor. Thus, tracking performance is not just influenced by variables that make it easier or harder to tell moving objects apart and to follow their movements. The human visual system is also sensitive to where and how objects move within a scene. It processes scene-based depth cues during visual attentive tracking and is better prepared for certain object movements in scenes because of prior experience.
Publications
- (2013). A single unexpected change in target- but not distractor motion impairs multiple object tracking. I-Perception, 4(1), 81–83
Meyerhoff, H. S., Papenmeier, F., Jahn, G., & Huff, M.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.1068/i0567sas) - (2014). Tracking by location and features: Object correspondence across spatiotemporal discontinuities during multiple object tracking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(1), 159–171
Papenmeier, F., Meyerhoff, H. S., Jahn, G., & Huff, M.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033117) - (2015). Distractor locations influence multiple object tracking beyond interobject spacing: Evidence from equidistant distractor displacements. Experimental Psychology, 62, 170–180
Meyerhoff, H. S., Papenmeier, F., Jahn, G., & Huff, M.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000283) - (2016). All eyes on relevance: Strategic allocation of attention as a result of feature-based task demands in multiple object tracking. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78, 2090–2109
Brockhoff, A., & Huff, M.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-016-1129-0) - (2016). Not FLEXible enough: Exploring the temporal dynamics of attentional reallocations with the multiple object tracking paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 42(6), 776–787
Meyerhoff, H. S., Papenmeier, F., Jahn, G., & Huff, M.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000187) - (2016). Viewpoint matters: Exploring the involvement of reference frames in multiple object tracking from a developmental perspective. Cognitive Development, 37, 1–8
Brockhoff, A., Papenmeier, F., Wolf, K., Pfeiffer, T., Jahn, G., & Huff, M.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2015.10.004) - (2017). Studying visual attention using the multiple object tracking paradigm: A tutorial review. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 1–20
Meyerhoff, H. S., Papenmeier, F., & Huff, M.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-017-1338-1) - (2017). Upside-down: Perceived space affects object-based attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43(7), 1269–1274
Papenmeier, F., Meyerhoff, H. S., Brockhoff, A., Jahn, G., & Huff, M.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000421)
