Spatial and temporal massive memory in humans.

It is well known that humans have a massive memory for pictures and scenes.1,2,3,4 They show an ability to encode thousands of images with only a few seconds of exposure to each. In addition to this massive memory for "what" observers have seen, three experiments reported here show that observers have a "spatial massive memory" (SMM) for "where" stimuli have been seen and a "temporal massive memory" (TMM) for "when" stimuli have been seen. The positions in time and space for at least dozens of items can be reported with good, if not perfect accuracy. Previous work has suggested that there might be good memory for stimulus location,5,6 but there do not seem to have been concerted efforts to measure the extent of this memory. Moreover, in our method, observers are recalling where items were located and not merely recognizing the correct location. This is interesting because massive memory is sometimes thought to be limited to recognition tasks based on sense of familiarity.

Hiding the Rabbit: Using a genetic algorithm to investigate shape guidance in visual search.

During visual search, attention is guided by specific features, including shape. Our understanding of shape guidance is limited to specific attributes (closures and line terminations) that do not fully explain the richness of preattentive shape processing. We used a novel genetic algorithm method to explore shape space and to stimulate hypotheses about shape guidance. Initially, observers searched for targets among 12 random distractors defined, in radial frequency space, by the amplitude and phase of 10 radial frequencies. Reaction time (RT) was the measure of "fitness." To evolve toward an easier search task, distractors with faster RTs survived to the next generation, "mated," and produced offspring (new distractors for the next generation of search). To evolve a harder search, surviving distractors were those yielding longer RTs. Within eight generations of evolution, the method succeeds in producing visual searches either harder or easier than the starting search. In radial frequency space, easy distractors evolve amplitude × frequency spectra that are dissimilar to the target, whereas hard distractors evolve spectra that are more similar to the target. This method also works with naturally shaped targets (e.g., rabbit silhouettes). Interestingly, the most inefficient distractors featured a combination of a body and ear distractors that did not resemble the rabbit (visually or in spectrum). Adding extra ears to these distractors did not impact the search spectrally and instead made it easier to confirm a rabbit, once it was found. In general, these experiments show that shapes that are clearly distinct when attended are similar to each other preattentively.

Perception in dynamic scenes: What is your Heider capacity?

The classic animation experiment by Heider and Simmel (1944) revealed that humans have a strong tendency to impose narrative even on displays showing interactions between simple geometric shapes. In their most famous animation with three simple shapes, observers almost inevitably interpreted them as rational agents with intentions, desires, and beliefs ("That nasty big triangle!"). Much work on dynamic scenes has identified basic visual properties that can make shapes seem animate. Here, we investigate the limits on the ability to use narrative to share information about animated scenes. We created 30 second Heider-style cartoons with 3-9 items. Item trajectories were generated automatically by a simple set of rules, but without a script. In Experiments 1 and 2, 10 observers wrote short narratives for each cartoon. Next, new observers were shown a cartoon and then presented with a narrative generated for that specific cartoon or one generated for a different cartoon having the same items. Observers rated the fit of the narrative to the cartoon on a scale from 1 (clearly does not fit) to 5 (clearly fits). Performance declined markedly when the number of items was larger than 3. Experiment 3 had observers determine if a short clip of a cartoon came from a longer clip. Experiment 4 had observers determine which of two narratives fit a cartoon. Finally, in Experiment 5, narratives always mentioned every item in a display. In all cases of matching narrative to cartoon, performance drops most dramatically between 3 and 4 items. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Saccadic Adaptation Alters the Attentional Field.

It is currently unknown whether changes to the oculomotor system can induce changes to the distribution of spatial attention around a fixated target. Previous studies have used perceptual performance tasks to show that adaptation of saccadic eye movements affects dynamic properties of visual attention, in particular, attentional shifts to a cued location. In this study, we examined the effects of saccadic adaptation on the static distribution of visual attention around fixation (attentional field). We used the classic double step adaptation procedure and a flanker task to test for differences in the attentional field after forward and backward adaptation. Reaction time (RT) measures revealed that the shape of the attentional field changed significantly after backward adaptation as shown through altered interference from distracters at different eccentricities but not after forward adaptation. This finding reveals that modification of saccadic amplitudes can affect metrics of not only dynamic properties of attention but also its static properties. A major implication is that the neural mechanisms underlying fundamental selection mechanisms and the oculomotor system can reweight each other.