Intertrial priming

Last updated

In cognitive psychology, intertrial priming is an accumulation of the priming effect over multiple trials, where "priming" is the effect of the exposure to one stimulus on subsequently presented stimuli. Intertrial priming occurs when a target feature (the characteristic that distinguishes targets from non-targets) is repeated from one trial to the next, and typically results in speeded response times to the target. A target is the stimulus participants are required to search for. For example, intertrial priming occurs when the task is to respond to either a red or a green target, and the response time to a red target is faster if the preceding trial also has a red target. [1]

Contents

Top-down and bottom-up attention

Visual attention is influenced by top down and bottom up attentional processes. Top-down attention is allocated based on an observer's current knowledge about the stimuli. Participants in an experiment might be instructed to search for, and respond to a target object presented in a display that is a different colour than the other objects presented simultaneously. Top down knowledge of the dimension of the target (i.e. colour) can speed response times to target identification. [2]

Bottom-up attention is involuntarily and automatically directed towards salient features in the environment such as a bright colour among dull colours. In experimental settings, the more different a stimulus is from other stimuli in a visual display, the more salient it is. Bottom-up attention is typically not guided by observers' goals or knowledge, only by the physical properties of the stimuli. [3] Many studies employ various methods involving intertrial priming to assess the contribution of top down versus bottom up processes in guiding attention in visual search tasks.

Integrative framework

There are factors in visual search tasks that the top down versus bottom up dichotomy does not take into consideration. Not all selection biases can be explained by physical saliency (bottom up) or observer goals (top down). [4] Studies that have found that stimuli that are equally salient and are connected with rewards and can draw a participants' attention, even if this choice doesn't match their selection goals. An alternative framework has been proposed where past selection history, current goals and physical salience are integrated in a model of attentional control. [4]

Measuring the effects of intertrial priming

Intertrial priming is an important aspect to consider in designing an experiment as it can influence the results if it is not considered/controlled. Intertrial priming is often measured using a visual search task. A typical visual search task involves participants searching for, and responding to, a target amongst a group of non-target items. Intertrial priming performance is generally measured by recording participants' reaction times to identify a target and comparing these times across trials. Different trial designs and visual search tasks can be employed to measure intertrial priming.

Blocked and mixed trials

Studies often compare blocked and mixed visual search trials to measure intertrial priming. Blocked trials are multiple, successively presented visual search trials that include the same target, and mixed trials are a randomised series of trials, each trial consisting of different targets. [5] For example, a blocked trial condition may include searching for a green circle in trial 1, and in multiple successive preceding trials, whereas a mixed trial condition may include searching a for a green circle in trial 1, but a red circle in the proceeding trials. Blocking trials can control for effects of variability in targets. When a target with the same defining feature is repeated across trials (blocked conditions), participants reaction times are faster than when the target is not the same across trials (mixed conditions). [5] This repetition effect is also cumulative. As the number of target repetitions increases, up to a certain point, participants reaction times are faster each time they are exposed to the same target in repeated trials. [5] In mixed and blocked trials there can be a disparity in intertrial priming that results in faster reaction times in the blocked trials. [6] Reaction times may be faster in blocked trials because participants are required to respond to targets that differ in only one dimension from non-targets.

Cueing

A cue is a presentation of a stimulus prior to a trial to inform the participant of an upcoming target feature. For example, a blue circle may be shown before a trial to signify a blue circle will be the target in the upcoming trial. Target relevant cues may be presented to participants to decrease their reaction time to the target in the display. These cues may be valid or invalid. Valid cues correctly predict the target stimulus but invalid cues do not. For example, if the target in an upcoming trial is a blue circle, a blue circle presented as a cue would be valid, but if a red circle was presented as a cue it would be invalid, as it does not correctly predict the blue circle target stimulus. Reaction times to valid cues are typically faster than reaction times to invalid cues. [1] This phenomenon is known as a cueing effect. [1]

Cue validity effect

When a valid cue has a low probability of correct target prediction, there can still be a reliable cueing effect for valid cues, and faster reaction times to valid cues than invalid cues. [7] This suggests that the cueing effect is not affected by the predictive nature of the cue, and may not be due to top-down control. If top-down control is involved in the response selection then invalid trials should have a faster response than valid trials because participants are aware that the likelihood of being presented with a valid trial is very low.

Pop-out search tasks include a target that differs in one dimension from a group of homogeneous non-target items. [8] A dimension is a categorical feature of a stimulus such as its colour (i.e. a red target among green non-targets), its shape (a square target among circle non-targets) or its orientation (a vertically presented target among horizontal non-targets). Response times in pop-out searches are generally faster to targets when the colour of both targets and distractors remains the same throughout trials, and slower when these colours are switched during trials. [1]

A conjunctive search involves non-target stimuli that have more than one dimension in common with the target stimulus. For example, when a target is a green circle in a conjunctive search, non-targets (distractors) could be red circles and green squares. [9] The target will share one dimension in common with one set of non-targets (i.e. shape) and another dimension in common with the other non-target group (i.e. colour). If target and distractor features are the same over consecutive trials, response times are faster than when these dimensions are not repeated. [10]

Why it occurs (major theories)

Dimension-weighting account theory

The "dimension-weighting account" of visual selection states that there is a limit to the attentional weight that can be allocated to a particular dimension of an object at any one time. The dimensions of stimuli perceived as important to an observer are allocated more attentional weight (i.e. a target in a visual search), resulting in faster detection times. If a target dimension is known in advance, this can increase the saliency signals of the target. On the other hand, if the target dimension is unknown, attentional weight has to be shifted to the target dimension. When target dimensions remain the same across trials there is no change in attentional weight required, resulting in faster reaction times (intertrial facilitation). [11]

Priming of pop-out hypothesis

The priming of pop-out hypothesis [1] suggests performance in a visual search task involving a pop-out target can be affected by the search history of specific target features in previous trials. If target and distractor features are repeated in subsequent trials, reaction times will be faster than if these features change across trials. [1] The hypothesis proposes the repetition of a target used in a preceding trial makes its pop-out features more salient to an observer and therefore increases the likelihood the observer will attend to it.

Episodic retrieval hypothesis

The episodic retrieval model [12] suggests reduced response times in intertrial priming are due to the observers' retrieval of episodic memories relevant to the task. [13] The hypothesis states that visual search is composed of three successive stages of processing:

  1. search for a target,
  2. decide if the chosen target is the target of interest, and
  3. select and respond to the chosen target. [12]

This hypothesis argues that when a target presented in a previous trial is presented again in the current trial, processing of the target is accelerated in the target decision stage of the model, so that after identification the target is verified to assess whether it matches the previous target stored in episodic memory.

Perceptual grouping of distractors account

Many theories focus on the repetition of target features as dominant explanation for the repetition effects seen in intertrial priming. If target features are the same over consecutive trials but distractor features are changed, response times are not as fast as if both target and distractor features are kept constant over trials. [10] This suggests that intertrial priming may mainly be due to distractor feature repetition, and target feature repetition influences this only slightly. This distractor-based priming may be due to faster perceptual grouping of distractors across trials. Perceptual grouping of distractors allows the target presence or absence to be distinguished more quickly. [10] However, the repetition of target defining features cannot be excluded as a contributor to the priming effect found in conjunctive searches. [14]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Attention</span> Psychological process of selectively eating and have discrete aspects of information

Attention is the concentration of awareness on some phenomenon to the exclusion of other stimuli. It is a process of selectively concentrating on a discrete aspect of information, whether considered subjective or objective. William James (1890) wrote that "Attention is the taking possession by the mind, in clear and vivid form, of one out of what seem several simultaneously possible objects or trains of thought. Focalization, concentration, of consciousness are of its essence." Attention has also been described as the allocation of limited cognitive processing resources. Attention is manifested by an attentional bottleneck, in terms of the amount of data the brain can process each second; for example, in human vision, only less than 1% of the visual input data can enter the bottleneck, leading to inattentional blindness.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wishful thinking</span> Formation of beliefs based on what might be pleasing to imagine

Wishful thinking is the formation of beliefs based on what might be pleasing to imagine, rather than on evidence, rationality, or reality. It is a product of resolving conflicts between belief and desire.

Inattentional blindness or perceptual blindness occurs when an individual fails to perceive an unexpected stimulus in plain sight, purely as a result of a lack of attention rather than any vision defects or deficits. When it becomes impossible to attend to all the stimuli in a given situation, a temporary "blindness" effect can occur, as individuals fail to see unexpected but often salient objects or stimuli.

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to an orientation mechanism that briefly enhances the speed and accuracy with which an object is detected after the object is attended, but then impairs detection speed and accuracy. IOR is usually measured with a cue-response paradigm, in which a person presses a button when they detect a target stimulus following the presentation of a cue that indicates the location in which the target will appear. The cue can be exogenous, or endogenous. Inhibition of return results from oculomotor activation, regardless of whether it was produced by exogenous signals or endogenously. Although IOR occurs for both visual and auditory stimuli, IOR is greater for visual stimuli, and is studied more often than auditory stimuli.

Visual search is a type of perceptual task requiring attention that typically involves an active scan of the visual environment for a particular object or feature among other objects or features. Visual search can take place with or without eye movements. The ability to consciously locate an object or target amongst a complex array of stimuli has been extensively studied over the past 40 years. Practical examples of using visual search can be seen in everyday life, such as when one is picking out a product on a supermarket shelf, when animals are searching for food among piles of leaves, when trying to find a friend in a large crowd of people, or simply when playing visual search games such as Where's Wally?

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Negative priming</span> Initial stimulus inhibits response to subsequent stimulus

Negative priming is an implicit memory effect in which prior exposure to a stimulus unfavorably influences the response to the same stimulus. It falls under the category of priming, which refers to the change in the response towards a stimulus due to a subconscious memory effect. Negative priming describes the slow and error-prone reaction to a stimulus that is previously ignored. For example, a subject may be imagined trying to pick a red pen from a pen holder. The red pen becomes the target of attention, so the subject responds by moving their hand towards it. At this time, they mentally block out all other pens as distractors to aid in closing in on just the red pen. After repeatedly picking the red pen over the others, switching to the blue pen results in a momentary delay picking the pen out. The slow reaction due to the change of the distractor stimulus to target stimulus is called the negative priming effect.

In cognitive psychology, the Eriksen flanker task is a set of response inhibition tests used to assess the ability to suppress responses that are inappropriate in a particular context. The target is flanked by non-target stimuli which correspond either to the same directional response as the target, to the opposite response, or to neither. The task is named for American psychologists Barbara. A. Eriksen & Charles W. Eriksen, who first published the task in 1974, and for the flanker stimuli that surround the target. In the tests, a directional response is assigned to a central target stimulus. Various forms of the task are used to measure information processing and selective attention.

Priming is the idea that exposure to one stimulus may influence a response to a subsequent stimulus, without conscious guidance or intention. The priming effect refers to the positive or negative effect of a rapidly presented stimulus on the processing of a second stimulus that appears shortly after. Generally speaking, the generation of priming effect depends on the existence of some positive or negative relationship between priming and target stimuli. For example, the word nurse might be recognized more quickly following the word doctor than following the word bread. Priming can be perceptual, associative, repetitive, positive, negative, affective, semantic, or conceptual. Priming effects involve word recognition, semantic processing, attention, unconscious processing, and many other issues, and are related to differences in various writing systems. Research, however, has yet to firmly establish the duration of priming effects, yet their onset can be almost instantaneous.

Serial reaction time (SRT) is a commonly used parameter in the measurement of unconscious learning processes. This parameter is operationalised through a SRT task, in which participants are asked to repeatedly respond to a fixed set of stimuli in which each cue signals that a particular response needs to be made. Unbeknownst to the participant, there are probabilities governing the occurrence of the cues as they appear in both a repeated sequence and randomised order, thus required responses following one cue have some predictability, influencing reaction-time. As a result, reaction-time to these cues becomes increasingly fast as subjects learn and utilise these transition probabilities.

Task switching, or set-shifting, is an executive function that involves the ability to unconsciously shift attention between one task and another. In contrast, cognitive shifting is a very similar executive function, but it involves conscious change in attention. Together, these two functions are subcategories of the broader cognitive flexibility concept.

Auditory spatial attention is a specific form of attention, involving the focusing of auditory perception to a location in space.

In neuroscience, the visual P200 or P2 is a waveform component or feature of the event-related potential (ERP) measured at the human scalp. Like other potential changes measurable from the scalp, this effect is believed to reflect the post-synaptic activity of a specific neural process. The P2 component, also known as the P200, is so named because it is a positive going electrical potential that peaks at about 200 milliseconds after the onset of some external stimulus. This component is often distributed around the centro-frontal and the parieto-occipital areas of the scalp. It is generally found to be maximal around the vertex of the scalp, however there have been some topographical differences noted in ERP studies of the P2 in different experimental conditions.

Pre-attentive processing is the subconscious accumulation of information from the environment. All available information is pre-attentively processed. Then, the brain filters and processes what is important. Information that has the highest salience or relevance to what a person is thinking about is selected for further and more complete analysis by conscious (attentive) processing. Understanding how pre-attentive processing works is useful in advertising, in education, and for prediction of cognitive ability.

Images and other stimuli contain both local features and global features. Precedence refers to the level of processing to which attention is first directed. Global precedence occurs when an individual more readily identifies the global feature when presented with a stimulus containing both global and local features. The global aspect of an object embodies the larger, overall image as a whole, whereas the local aspect consists of the individual features that make up this larger whole. Global processing is the act of processing a visual stimulus holistically. Although global precedence is generally more prevalent than local precedence, local precedence also occurs under certain circumstances and for certain individuals. Global precedence is closely related to the Gestalt principles of grouping in that the global whole is a grouping of proximal and similar objects. Within global precedence, there is also the global interference effect, which occurs when an individual is directed to identify the local characteristic, and the global characteristic subsequently interferes by slowing the reaction time.

Subliminal stimuli are any sensory stimuli below an individual's threshold for conscious perception, in contrast to supraliminal stimuli. A 2012 review of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies showed that subliminal stimuli activate specific regions of the brain despite participants' unawareness. Visual stimuli may be quickly flashed before an individual can process them, or flashed and then masked to interrupt processing. Audio stimuli may be played below audible volumes or masked by other stimuli.

Object-based attention refers to the relationship between an ‘object’ representation and a person’s visually stimulated, selective attention, as opposed to a relationship involving either a spatial or a feature representation; although these types of selective attention are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Research into object-based attention suggests that attention improves the quality of the sensory representation of a selected object, and results in the enhanced processing of that object’s features.

The Posner cueing task, also known as the Posner paradigm, is a neuropsychological test often used to assess attention. Formulated by Michael Posner, it assesses a person's ability to perform an attentional shift. It has been used and modified to assess disorders, focal brain injury, and the effects of both on spatial attention.

Visual spatial attention is a form of visual attention that involves directing attention to a location in space. Similar to its temporal counterpart visual temporal attention, these attention modules have been widely implemented in video analytics in computer vision to provide enhanced performance and human interpretable explanation of deep learning models.

Perceptual load theory is a psychological theory of attention. It was presented by Nilli Lavie in the mid-nineties as a potential resolution to the early/late selection debate.

In psychology, contextual cueing refers to a form of visual search facilitation which describe targets appearing in repeated configurations are detected more quickly. The contextual cueing effect is a learning phenomenon where repeated exposure to a specific arrangement of target and distractor items leads to progressively more efficient search.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Maljkovic, V; Nakayama, K (November 1994). "Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features". Memory & Cognition. 22 (6): 657–72. doi: 10.3758/bf03209251 . PMID   7808275.
  2. ↑ Treisman, A; Gormican, S (January 1988). "Feature analysis in early vision: evidence from search asymmetries". Psychological Review. 95 (1): 15–48. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.95.1.15. PMID   3353475.
  3. ↑ Connor, Charles E.; Egeth, Howard E.; Yantis, Steven (2004). "Visual Attention: Bottom-Up Versus Top-Down". Current Biology. 14 (19): R850–R852. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2004.09.041 . PMID   15458666.
  4. 1 2 Awh, Edward; Belopolsky, Artem V.; Theeuwes, Jan (2012). "Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: a failed theoretical dichotomy". Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 16 (8): 437–443. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2012.06.010. PMC   3426354 . PMID   22795563.
  5. 1 2 3 Hillstrom, Anne P. (2000). "Repetition effects in visual search". Perception & Psychophysics. 62 (4): 800–817. doi: 10.3758/BF03206924 . PMID   10883586.
  6. ↑ Bravo, Mary J.; Nakayama, Ken (1992). "The role of attention in different visual-search tasks". Perception & Psychophysics. 51 (5): 465–472. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.155.4133 . doi:10.3758/BF03211642. S2CID   14089100.
  7. ↑ Theeuwes, Jan; Reimann, Brit; Mortier, Karen (2006). "Visual search for featural singletons: No top-down modulation, only bottom-up priming". Visual Cognition. 14 (4–8): 466–489. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.78.1306 . doi:10.1080/13506280500195110. S2CID   17821905.
  8. ↑ Becker, Stefanie I. (2008). "The mechanism of priming: Episodic retrieval or priming of pop-out?". Acta Psychologica. 127 (2): 324–339. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2007.07.005. PMID   17868628.
  9. ↑ Treisman, Anne M.; Gelade, Garry (January 1980). "A feature-integration theory of attention". Cognitive Psychology. 12 (1): 97–136. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(80)90005-5. PMID   7351125. S2CID   353246.
  10. 1 2 3 Geyer, Thomas; Müller, Hermann J.; Krummenacher, Joseph (2007). "Cross-trial priming of element positions in visual pop-out search is dependent on stimulus arrangement". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 33 (4): 788–797. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.33.4.788. PMID   17683228.
  11. ↑ Found, Andrew; Müller, Hermann J. (1996). "Searching for unknown feature targets on more than one dimension: Investigating a 'dimension-weighting' account". Perception & Psychophysics. 58 (1): 88–101. doi: 10.3758/BF03205479 . PMID   8668524.
  12. 1 2 Huang, Liqiang; Holcombe, Alex; Pashler, Harold (2004). "Repetition priming in visual search: Episodic retrieval, not feature priming". Memory & Cognition. 1 (32): 12–20. doi: 10.3758/bf03195816 . PMID   15078040.
  13. ↑ Olivers, Christian N. L.; Meeter, Martijn (2008). "Feature priming in visual search does not depend on the dimensional context" (PDF). Visual Cognition. 16 (6): 785–803. doi:10.1080/13506280701428658. hdl:1871/16531. S2CID   56546169.
  14. ↑ Kristjánsson, Árni; Wang, DeLiang; Nakayama, Ken (2002). "The role of priming in conjunctive visual search". Cognition. 85 (1): 37–52. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.116.8419 . doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00074-4. PMID   12086712. S2CID   17052941.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.