↓ Skip to main content

Target–object integration, attention distribution, and object orientation interactively modulate object-based selection

Overview of attention for article published in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Target–object integration, attention distribution, and object orientation interactively modulate object-based selection
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, May 2016
DOI 10.3758/s13414-016-1126-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shahd Al-Janabi, Adam S. Greenberg

Abstract

The representational basis of attentional selection can be object-based. Various studies have suggested, however, that object-based selection is less robust than spatial selection across experimental paradigms. We sought to examine the manner by which the following factors might explain this variation: Target-Object Integration (targets 'on' vs. part 'of' an object), Attention Distribution (narrow vs. wide), and Object Orientation (horizontal vs. vertical). In Experiment 1, participants discriminated between two targets presented 'on' an object in one session, or presented as a change 'of' an object in another session. There was no spatial cue-thus, attention was initially focused widely-and the objects were horizontal or vertical. We found evidence of object-based selection only when targets constituted a change 'of' an object. Additionally, object orientation modulated the sign of object-based selection: We observed a same-object advantage for horizontal objects, but a same-object cost for vertical objects. In Experiment 2, an informative cue preceded a single target presented 'on' an object or as a change 'of' an object (thus, attention was initially focused narrowly). Unlike in Experiment 1, we found evidence of object-based selection independent of target-object integration. We again found that the sign of selection was modulated by the objects' orientation. This result may reflect a meridian effect, which emerged due to anisotropies in the cortical representations when attention is oriented endogenously. Experiment 3 revealed that object orientation did not modulate object-based selection when attention was oriented exogenously. Our findings suggest that target-object integration, attention distribution, and object orientation modulate object-based selection, but only in combination.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 30 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 13%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 5 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 55%
Neuroscience 7 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Unknown 5 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 May 2016.
All research outputs
#16,287,458
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#848
of 1,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,919
of 338,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#16
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 338,959 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.