Abstract:Recent studies have shown spatial heterogeneity in the perception of multiple feature dimensions (Afraz, Pashkam, & Cavanagh, 2010), and also stable individual biases in object localization (Kosovicheva & Whitney, 2017). Considering the role of selective attention in visual perception (Boynton, 2005; Luck & Ford, 1998), we hypothesized that attentional capture would also exhibit spatial heterogeneity across display locations. In 3 experiments, we used modified versions of the additional singleton paradigm (Theeuwes, 1991, 1992) to test this hypothesis. In Experiment 1, distractors were defined on the color dimension. We tuned the relative saliency of the only color singleton into 5 levels using a linear interpolation method. A vertical segment or a horizontal segment was contained within the target form singleton, which appeared equally-often at each of the eight locations. After the location of the target was set, the color distractor appeared equally-often at the other seven locations. In Experiment 2 and 3, distractors were defined on the orientation and size dimension respectively. The five distractor saliency conditions were specified by the relative inclination of the line segment contained within one of the non-target stimuli in Experiment 2, and by the relative size of one of the non-target stimuli in Experiment 3. The results showed a unique spatial distractibility pattern for each participant, with RT (reaction time) at some display locations demonstrating significant differences between distractor-present and distractor-absent conditions while some not. The stability and distinctiveness of spatial heterogeneity for attentional capture susceptibility for each participant were demonstrated by the high within-individual effect size correlation between 2 rounds and the low between-individual effect size correlation across display locations. These findings suggest that stimuli displayed at some spatial locations seem to be intrinsically easier to capture attention, which offers further insights for understanding the relationship between visual attention and perception.

Thermo-Mechanical Model of Solidification Processes with Abaqus

Manipulation of attention affects subitizing performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Distributed and focused attention: neuropsychological evidence for separate attentional mechanisms when counting and estimating

Subitizing endures in sequential rather than simultaneous comparison tasks

Effects Of Awareness On Numerosity Adaptation

Distinct Mechanisms in the Numerosity Processing of Random and Regular Dots.

The value of lumbar spine MRI in the assessment of the pars interarticularis.

Cross-modal Attention Modulates Tactile Subitizing but Not Tactile Numerosity Estimation

The multiple dimensions of sustained attention

Asymmetric Switch Cost Between Subitizing and Estimation in Tactile Modality

Pre-attentive visual selection

The Attentional Blink Between Two Color Processing Tasks

Individual differences in selective attention reveal the nonmonotonicity of visual spatial attention and its association with working memory capacity.

Attentional bias induced by stimulus control (ABC) impairs measures of the approximate number system

Spatial Heterogeneity for Attentional Capture Susceptibility

Attention is Required for Knowledge-Based Sequential Grouping: Insights from the Integration of Syllables into Words.

Behavior in a visual search task with moving dot stimuli

Adaptation biases the parallel perception of subitized numerosities

The interplay between spatial and non-spatial grouping cues over approximate number perception

Ensemble perception and focused attention: Two different modes of visual processing to cope with limited capacity

Endogenous attention modulates automaticity of number processing