4.2 Article

Social prioritisation in scene viewing and the effects of a spatial memory load

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-023-02769-3

关键词

Attentional capture; Eye movements and visual attention; Memory; Visual working and short-term memory

向作者/读者索取更多资源

When free-viewing scenes, participants tend to preferentially fixate social elements. This preference can be disrupted by increasing the demands of a secondary spatial memory task. Results showed that the preference to look at social elements decreased when the demands of the memory task were increased from one to six locations, regardless of presentation mode. The high-load condition also resulted in more central fixations and reduced exploration of the scene.
When free-viewing scenes, participants tend to preferentially fixate social elements (e.g., people). In the present study, we tested whether this bias would be disrupted by increasing the demands of a secondary dual-task: holding a set of (one or six) spatial locations in memory, presented either simultaneously or sequentially. Following a retention interval, participants judged whether a test location was present in the to-be-remembered stimuli. During the retention interval participants free-viewed scenes containing a social element (a person) and a non-social element (an object) that served as regions of interest. In order to assess the impact of physical salience, the non-social element was presented in both an unaltered baseline version, and in a version where its salience was artificially increased. The results showed that the preference to look at social elements decreased when the demands of the spatial memory task were increased from one to six locations, regardless of presentation mode (simultaneous or sequential). The high-load condition also resulted in more central fixations and reduced exploration of the scene. The results indicate that the social prioritisation effect, and scene viewing more generally, can be affected by a concurrent memory load.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据