DOI: 10.14704/nq.2018.16.6.1592

Inhibition Effect of Spatial Attention on Surroundings in Discrimination Task

Linyan Xue, Kun Liu, Shipeng Zhang, Kun Yang


The cue size effect which is characterized as a reverse relationship between the cue size and the detection speed is regarded as a proof for adjustment of the attentional field according to the cue size. This effect was mainly found in detection experiments. As several studies have shown that cues had discrepant effects in visual detection and discrimination task, it’s natural to ask whether cue size effect still exist in discrimination task. The probability exists that the influence of cue size differ in these two basic types of behavioral tasks. To solve the problem, we assessed the interference of surrounding ring on discrimination at its center with a multiple cuing design. The results show that in distributed neutral condition when no single place gains overwhelming advantage from attention, ring size has a positive correlation with the discrimination speed. However, when the exact place of impending target is cued and spatial attention takes effect, variance in surrounding ring size makes no difference on discrimination. This type of result pattern doesn’t depend on what is discriminated (orientation or brightness) or how the spatial attention is induced (by peripheral ring cue or central symbolic line cue). Our findings add evidence to the view that detection and discrimination should not be considered as the same. We also propose that with sufficient time, attention suppresses the impact from the vicinity.


Cue Size Effect, Multiple Cues, Discrimination, Peripheral Vision, Crowding

Full Text:



Anton-Erxleben K, Stephan VM, Treue S. Attention reshapes center-surround receptive field structure in macaque cortical area MT. Cerebral Cortex 2009; 19(10): 2466-78.

Averbach E, Coriell AS. Short-term memory in vision. Bell System Technical Journal 1961; 40(1): 309-28.

Bouma H. Interaction effects in parafoveal letter recognition. Nature 1970; 226(5241):177-78.

Brainard DH. The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision 1997; 10: 433-36.

Breitmeyer BG, Kafalıgönül H, Öğmen H, Mardon L, Todd S, Ziegler R. Meta- and paracontrast reveal differences between contour- and brightness-processing mechanisms. Vision Research 2006; 46(17): 2645-58.

Castiello U, Umiltà C. Size of the attentional focus and efficiency of processing. Acta psychologica (Amst) 1990; 73(3): 195-209.

Castiello U, Umiltà C. Splitting focal attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance 1992; 18(3): 837-48.

Eriksen CW, St James JD. Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: a zoom lens model. Percept Psychophys 1986; 40(4): 225-40.

Ester EF, Fukuda K, May LM, Vogel EK, Awh E. Evidence for a fixed capacity limit in attending multiple locations. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience 2014; 14(1): 62-77.

Facoetti A, Lorusso ML, Paganoni P, Cattaneo C, Galli R, Mascetti GG. The time course of attentional focusing in dyslexic and normally reading children. Brain and Cognition 2003; 53(2): 181-84.

Facoetti A, Paganoni P, Turatto M, Marzola V, Mascetti GG. Visual-Spatial Attention in Developmental Dyslexia. Cortex 2000; 36(1): 109-23.

Herrmann K, Montaser-Kouhsari L, Carrasco M, Heeger DJ. When size matters: attention affects performance by contrast or response gain. Nature Neuroscience 2010; 13(12): 1554-59.

Hol K, Treue S. Different populations of neurons contribute to the detection and discrimination of visual motion. Vision Research 2001; 41(6): 685-89.

Itthipuripat S, Garcia JO, Rungratsameetaweemana N, Sprague TC, Serences JT. Changing the Spatial Scope of Attention Alters Patterns of Neural Gain in Human Cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience 2014; 34(1): 112-23.

Kafaligönül H, Breitmeyer BG, Öğmen H. Effects of contrast polarity in paracontrast masking. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2009; 71(7): 1576-87.

Ling S, Carrasco M. Transient covert attention does alter appearance: A reply to Schneider (2006). Perception & Psychophysics 2007; 69(6): 1051-58.

Lubbe RHJVd, Vogel RO, Postma A. Different Effects of Exogenous Cues in a Visual Detection and Discrimination Task: Delayed Attention Withdrawal and/or Speeded Motor Inhibition?. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2005; 17(12): 1829-40.

McMains SA, Somers DC. Multiple spotlights of attentional selection in human visual cortex. Neuron 2004; 42(4): 677-86.

McMains SA, Somers DC. Processing efficiency of divided spatial attention mechanisms in human visual cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience 2005; 25(41): 9444-48.

Mizuno M, Umiltà C, Sartori G. Deficits in the control of the attentional focus in chronic schizophrenics. Cortex 1998; 34(2): 263-70.

Moran J, Desimone R. Selective attention gates visual processing in the extrastriate cortex. Science 1985; 229(4715): 782-84.

Panagopoulos A, von Grünau M, Galera C, Ivan L, Cavallet M. Does the strength of the attentional focus depend on the size of the cued area?. Journal of Vision 2006; 6(6): 598-598.

Pelli DG. The Video Toolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision 1997; 10(4): 437-42.

Pelli DG, Palomares M, Majaj NJ. Crowding is unlike ordinary masking: Distinguishing feature integration from detection. Journal of Vision 2004; 4(12): 12-12.

Reynolds JH, Heeger DJ. The Normalization Model of Attention. Neuron 2009; 61(2): 168-85.

Sagi D, Julesz B. Detection versus discrimination of visual orientation. Perception 1985; 14: 619-28.

Schneider KA. Does attention alter appearance? Perception & Psychophysics 2006; 68(5): 800-14.

Smith PL, Wolfgang BJ. The attentional dynamics of masked detection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2004; 30(1): 119-36.

Turatto M, Benso F, Facoetti A, Galfano G, Mascetti GG, Umiltà C. Automatic and voluntary focusing of attention. Perception & Psychophysics 2000; 62(5): 935-52.

Turatto M, Benso F, Mascetti GG, Umiltà C. The time course of attentional focusing. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 1998; 10(4): 373-88.

Umiltà FMC. The control of the attentional focus. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 1998; 10(3): 225-46.

Yeshurun Y, Carrasco M. Attention improves or impairs visual performance by enhancing spatial resolution. Nature 1998; 396(6706): 72-75.

Yeshurun Y, Montagna B, Carrasco M. On the flexibility of sustained attention and its effects on a texture segmentation task. Vision Research 2008; 48(1): 80-95.

Yeshurun Y, Rashal E. Precueing attention to the target location diminishes crowding and reduces the critical distance. Journal of Vision 2010; 10(10): 16.

Supporting Agencies

| NeuroScience + QuantumPhysics> NeuroQuantology :: Copyright 2001-2019