Attention capacity and task difficulty in visual search

Liqiang Huang, Harold Pashler*

Department of Psychology 0109, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA
92093, USA
Received 11 June 2004; accepted 27 June 2004

Abstract
When a visual search task is very difficult (as when a small feature difference defines the
target), even detection of a unique element may be substantially slowed by increases in
display set size. This has been attributed to the influence of attentional capacity limits.
We examined the influence of attentional capacity limits on three kinds of search task:
difficult feature search (with a subtle featural difference), difficult conjunction search,
and spatial-configuration search. In all 3 tasks, each trial contained sixteen items, divided
into two eight-item sets. The two sets were presented either successively or
simultaneously. Comparison of accuracy in successive versus simultaneous presentations
revealed that attentional capacity limitations are present only in the case of
spatialconfiguration search. While the other two types of task were inefficient (as
reflected in steep search slopes), no capacity limitations were evident. We conclude that
the difficulty of a visual search task affects search efficiency but does not necessarily
introduce attentional capacity limits.
Methods of participants
Eight subjects were paid to participate in this study. All had normal vision, and none were
aware of the purpose of this study. Stimuli were presented on a high-resolution color
monitor. Responses were recorded from two adjacent keys using a standard keyboard.
The subjects viewed the displays from a distance of about 60 cm.
Procedure
Each trial began with a small green fixation cross presented in the center of the screen.
Subjects were instructed to fixate the cross, which remained present for 400 ms. The
cross was followed by a short blank interval (400 ms), which was then followed by the
first display. In a speeded search block, each display remained until the subject
responded. In an SIM display, the entire display was presented for certain stimulus
duration and then replaced by the mask. In an SUCC display, the two sub-displays were
presented successively. Each sub-display was individually and locally masked after a
stimulus duration equal to that of a SIM display. The interval between the first and
second subdisplays was 500 ms, and the duration of the mask was 100 ms. The stimulus
duration was adjusted for each session to get appropriate accuracy levels (mean stimulus
durations were as follows: for feature search, 164 ms; for cojunction search, 146 ms; for
spatial configuration search, 189 ms). These adjustments were conducted using a
staircase: two successive correct responses led to a 1/11 decrease of stimulus duration;
one erroneous response led to a 1/10 increase, with the restriction that the stimulus
duration was never greater than 250 ms.
Results and Discussion

Our results suggest that although the difficulty of a search task (similarity
between target and distractors) determines search slopes, substantial slopes do not always
indicate the presence of an attentional capacity limit. Singleton and feature conjunction
searches can show little attentional capacity limitation even when the tasks are very
difficult by the standard criteria (e.g. Treisman & Gelade, 1980). It seems, therefore, that
attention capacity is not affected by search task efficiency, but rather is determined
mainly by the nature of the task. Unlimited-capacity processing that is fast and efficient
in easy tasks, when faced with harder tasks, may become slow, inefficient, and perhaps
inaccurate, but it still fails to show an attentional capacity limitation (i.e. the processing
of different parts of the display may be slow or inaccurate, but it is still independent of
processing in other parts of the display.) It should be noted that the RT slope of spatial
configuration search (48 ms/item) is greater than that of tasks 1 (35 ms/item) and 2 (39
ms/item). This fact points to one conceivable objection to our above interpretation: it is
possible that the influence of an attentional capacity limit is determined by difficulty
(search slope) in a highly non-linear fashion; perhaps we see no influence in tasks 1 and 2
only because their efficiency is less than some threshold reflecting the point where
attentional capacity limits come into play (e.g. a search slope over 40 ms/item). This
explanation, though not impossible, appears, unlikely, since naturally the intercept of
attention capacity vs. slope function should be zero if the attentional capacity limit effect
monotonically increases with the slope (the attention capacity should be non-zero when
the slope is non-zero). Another conceivable objection is that the search might have no
attention capacity limit when the set size is smaller than a certain number, but still show
attention capacity limits when the set size exceeds that number (see, e.g. Pashler, 1987,
for a related suggestion). The current results may be explained by assuming that the
number is greater than 16 for feature search but smaller than 16 for spatial-configuration
search. While this interpretation cannot be ruled out, it seems somewhat implausible.

Reference:
Carter, R. C. (1982). Visual search with color. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Human Perception and
Performance, 8, 127–136.
Carter, E. C., & Carter, R. C. (1981). Color and conspicuousness. Journal of Optical
Society of American, 71,
723–729.
Duncan, J. (1980). The demonstration of capacity limitation. Cognitive Psychology, 12,
75–96.
Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity.
Psychological Review, 96, 433–
458.
Effect of Template Complexity on
Visual Search and Dual-Task
Performance
Patrick A. Bourke1 and John Duncan2
1University of Lincoln, Lincoln, United Kingdom, and 2MRC Cognition and Brain
Sciences Unit, Cambridge, United
Kingdom
ABSTRACT
Even dissimilar tasks interfere with one another when done together. We used
visual search to examine the underlying cause of such interference. In many models,
visual search is a process of biased competition controlled by a template describing the
target to be sought. When the display is processed, matching against this template guides
attention to the target. We show that increasing template complexity increased
interference with a dissimilar concurrent task, story memory. This result was independent
of reaction time: Increases in template complexity were associated with no increase in
search time in Experiment 1 and with a decrease in search time in Experiment 2. The
results show that the dual-task demands of visual search reflect the complexity of the
template used in task control, and that this factor can be isolated from other sources of
difficulty.
Method of participants
Sixty-four participants were tested, 16 in each of four conditions. Participants
were first- and second-year undergraduate psychology students, predominantly female,
with a modal age of 19. They participated for participant-pool credit, a voluntary system
that allows subsequent use of the pool. They were not informed of the purpose of the
experiment and were unfamiliar with the story that was played for the memory task, as
well as with the visual search tasks used.
Procedure
In each of the three visual search tasks, the participant had to decide if the letter L
was present. This target was present on 50% of the trials. The target could occur at one of
eight positions evenly spaced on the perimeter of an imaginary circle that was centered
on a fixation cross and had a radius of approximately 5.41. In the first task, participants
had to decide if a target letter L was present in a display that could consist of eight Os or
seven Os and an L. Conventionally, this is considered a feature search task, because any
of several single features (e.g., curvature, closure) can be used to distinguish targets from
distractors. In the second task, only a single L was presented on each trial, and
participants had to decide whether the letter was the target, an L in its correct orientation,
or a distractor, an L that had been rotated 901 to the left or to the right.
Results and Discussion
The most striking aspect of the results is that the effect of the manipulations on reaction
time was not reflected in the effects on dual-task performance. First, feature search and
conjunction-without-distractors search did not differ in reaction times (or number of trials
presented), but there was a significant decrement in dual-task performance for
conjunction-without distractors search relative to feature search. Second, reaction times
were significantly longer for conjunction-with distractors search than for conjunction-
without-distractors search, but dual-task performance did not differ between these two
conditions.
Reference:

Bourke, P.A. (1997). Measuring attentional demand in continuous dual-task performance.

The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50A, 821–840.
Bourke, P.A., Duncan, J., & Nimmo-Smith, I. (1996). A general factor in dual task
performance decrement. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 525–
545.
Bundesen, C. (1990). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97, 523–547.
Cave, K., & Wolfe, J. (1990). Modelling the role of parallel processing in visual search.
Cognitive Psychology, 22, 225–271.
Dehaene, S., Kerszberg, M., & Changeux, J.P. (1998). A neuronal model of a global
workspace in effortful cognitive tasks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
USA, 95, 14529–14534.
Do New Objects Capture
Attention?
Steven L. Franconeri,1 Andrew Hollingworth,2 and Daniel J. Simons3
1Harvard University, 2University of Iowa, and 3University of Illinois
Abstract
The visual system relies on several heuristicsto direct attention to important
locations and objects. One of these mechanisms directs attention to sudden changes in the
environment. Although a substantial body of research suggests that this capture of
attention occurs only for the abrupt appearance of a new perceptual object, more recent
evidence shows that some luminance-based transients (e.g., motion and looming) and
some types of brightness change also capture attention. These findings show that new
objects are not necessary for attention capture. The present study tested whether they are
even sufficient. That is, does a new object attract attention because the visual system is
sensitive to new objects or because it is sensitive to the transients that new objects create?
In two experiments using a visual search task, new objects did not capture attention
unless they created a strong local luminance transient.
Methods of participant
Thirty-two University of Iowa undergraduates voluntarily participated in
exchange for course credit or pay. They reported normal or corrected-to-normal vision.
All stimuli were displayed on a 17-in. video monitor operating at 100 Hz. Responses
were collected by a serial button box. The experiment was controlled by a Pentium-based
computer running E-Prime software. Viewing position was maintained at 80 cm by a
forehead rest. The stimuli are illustrated in Figure 1. The background was gray (27.2
cd/m2), and the letters and fixation cross were black (<0.01 cd/m2).
Results and Discussion
Trials with response times greater than 3 s or less than 200 ms were removed from
the analysis (less than 1% of all trials). The mean error rate was 1.4%, and the error rate
was not greater than 2.3% in any condition. Accuracy data for each condition were again
submitted to a 2 _ 3 ANOVA with new-letter type(target, distractor) and set size as
factors. In the control condition, observers were more accurate when the new letter was
the target than when it was a distractor, F(1, 31) 5 6.7, p 5 .015. As in Experiment 1, new-
letter type did not interact with set size in either condition, both Fs(2, 62) < 1.4, ps > .25,
ruling out any speed-accuracy trade-offs.
Reference:
Abrams, R.A., & Christ, S.E. (2003). Motion onset captures attention.
Psychological Science, 14, 427–432.
Visual Search Does Not Remain Efficient When Executive
Working Memory Is Working
Sang-Hoon Han and Min-Shik Kim
Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea

Abstract
Working memory (WM) has been thought to include not only short-term memory
stores but also executive processes that operate on the contents of memory. The present
study examined the involvement of WM in search using a dual-task paradigm in which
participants performed visual search while manipulating or simply maintaining
information held in WM. Experiments 1a and 2a involved executive WM tasks that
required counting backward from a target digit and sorting a string of letters
alphabetically, respectively. In both experiments, the search slopes in the dual-task
condition were significantly steeper than those in a search-alone condition, indicating that
performing the WM manipulation tasks influenced the efficiency of visual search. In
contrast, when information was simply maintained in WM (Experiments 1b and 2b),
search slopes did not differ between the single- and dual-task conditions. These results
suggest that WM resources related to executive functions may be required in visual
search.
Method of participants
Forty undergraduate students (10 in each experiment) at Yonsei University, Korea,
participated for course credit, after giving informed consent. All had normal or corrected-
to-normal vision. None knew the purpose of the experiment or the expected result.
Procedure
Figure 1 illustrates the procedures in all four experiments. At the beginning of the
dual-task condition (memory and search) in Experiment 1a, a random three-digit number
was presented at the center of the display. In memory, participants were required to count
backward from that number by 3s. For the first 4 s, they performed this memory
manipulation task alone, and then a visual search array was presented. Participants were
required to use their left hand to make a speeded response to this array while they
continued to count backwards. The index or middle finger was used to press the ‘‘S’’ or
‘‘X’’ keyon the computer keyboard to indicate the presence of a top-gap or bottom-gap
target, respectively. The search array was presented until participants responded. A 1-s
blank period followed. Then the instruction message for the memory test (‘‘Write down
the number you just calculated’’) was presented until participants finished writing down
the number that they just had in memory. The next trial started when participants pressed
the space bar.
Results and Discussion
In this experiment, the participants were required to actively manipulate a
memory stimulus in the dual-task condition. Search slopes were significantly steeper in
this condition than in the search-alone condition, indicating that performing a WM task
influenced the efficiency of visual search. Our results contrast with those of Woodman
et al. (2001), suggesting that WM plays an important role in visual search and that there
is a close link between WM and attention. That is, WM resources, especially resources
involving executive functions, seem to be required in visual search.
Reference:
 Awh, E., Jonides, J., & Reuter-Lorenz, P. (1998). Rehearsal in spatial working memory.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 780–790.
Baddeley, A.D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556–559.
Brainard, D.H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 443–446.
Bundesen, C. (1990). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97,
523–547.
Cave, K.R., & Wolfe, J.M. (1990). Modeling the role of parallel processing in
visual search. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 225–271.
Independent Processing of
Parts and of Their Spatial
Organization in Complex
Visual Objects
Martin Arguin1 and Daniel Saumier1,2

Abstract
A visual search experiment using synthetic three-dimensional objects is reported.
The target shared its constituent parts, the spatial organization of its parts, or both with
the distractors displayed with it. Sharing of parts and sharing of spatial organization both
negatively affected visual search performance, and these effects were strictly additive.
These findings support theories of complex visual object perception that assume a parsing
of the stimulus into its higher-order constituents (volumetric parts or visible surfaces).
The additivity of the effects demonstrates that information on parts and information on
spatial organization are processed independently in visual search.
Methods of participant
Twelve students from the University of Montreal, Canada, took part in the
experiment. All had normal or corrected visual acuity, and they were naive as to the
purpose of the experiment.
Procedure
Subjects were instructed to indicate, on every trial, whether a particular target
object was present (50% of trials) in a display of a variable number of items. On target-
present trials, the two relevant distractors were replicated an equal number of times. We
maintained constant display size across target-present and target-absent trials by
presenting an unequal number of replications of the two distractors on target-absent trials.
For these trials, one distractor was replicated one more time than the other, with the two
distractors occurring an equal number of times within each block.
Results and Discussion
The sharing of parts and the sharing of spatial organization between the target and
distractors both affected visual search performance. Most important, these effects were
strictly additive. Part and spatialorganization sharing both resulted in increased RTs, as
well as in increased slopes of RTs as a function of the number of items displayed. These
findings have important implications with respect to the processes involved in the
perception of complex visual objects in the context of speeded visual tasks such as visual
search.
Reference:
Arguin, M., Bub, D., & Dudek, G. (1996). Shape integration for visual object
recognition and its implication in category-specific visual agnosia. Visual
Cognition, 3, 221–275.
Arguin, M., & Leek, E.C. (2003). Orientation-invariance in visual object
priming depends on prime-target asynchrony. Perception & Psychophysics,
65, 469–477.
Arguin, M., & Saumier, D. (2000). Conjunction and linear non-separability
effects in visual shape encoding. Vision Research, 40, 3099–3115.
Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition by components: A theory of human image
understanding. Psychological Review, 94, 65–96.
Stimulus-driven attentional capture:
An empirical comparison of display-size and
distance methods
Massimo Turatto and Giovanni Galfano
University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy
Simona Gardini and Gian Gastone Mascetti
University of Padua, Italy
Abstract
Subjects performed a visual search task for a vertical-target line embedded among
tilted-distractor lines, presented inside 4, 8, or 12 coloured discs. Interestingly, when the
colour singleton was task irrelevant, and data were analysed by means of the display-size
method combined with the zero-slope criterion, no evidence for attentional capture by
colour was found. However, when data were analysed by means of the distance method,
which consists of monitoring the spatial relationship between the target and the singleton,
results showed that the target was found faster and/or more accurately when it was inside
the singleton than when it was in a nonsingleton location. This provided evidence for a
stimulus-driven attentional capture. In addition, the application of signal detection
methodology showed that attentional capture, as revealed by the distance method,
resulted from a perceptual modulation at the singleton location, rather than from a
criterion shift. We conclude that, at least with the kind of stimuli used here, the display-
size method combined with the zero-slope criterion is less than ideal for investigating
how static discontinuities can affect the automatic deployment of visual attention.
Methods of participant
A total of 28 subjects (6 male and 22 female) from the University of Padua served
as subjects (age range 20–29 years). All had normal or corrected-to-normal visual acuity
and were unaware of the purpose of the experiment.
Procedure
Trials began with a fixation point presented for 500 ms, then the visual search
display was turned on and displayed only for 180 ms, rendering any eye movements
useless. From visual-search display onset, subjects had 2500 ms for responding. Half of
the subjects responded to target present with the left hand (“Q” key), and to target absent
with the right hand (“P” key), and the remainders vice versa. The feedback for the
incorrect responses was a 500-ms, 500-Hz tone, presented together with the message
“error”. If a response was not produced within 2500 ms, the same sound signal, along
with the display message “missed response”, was presented. Subjects were told to be as
accurate as possible in making their responses.
Results and Discussion
This experiment had the purpose of making a direct comparison between the
display-size method and the distance method in their capability to reveal a stimulus-
driven attentional capture by a colour singleton. In this regard, the results were very
interesting, revealing that if subjects’ performance was monitored by means of the
display-size method, no evidence of attentional capture emerged.
Reference:
Bacon, W. F., & Egeth, H. E. (1994). Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture.
Perception and Psychophysics,
55, 485–496.