Suppr超能文献

注意力分散时追踪动物:视觉追踪中动物会被优先考虑吗?

Chasing Animals With Split Attention: Are Animals Prioritized in Visual Tracking?

作者信息

Hagen Thomas, Espeseth Thomas, Laeng Bruno

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Norway.

Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Norway; NORMENT, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Norway.

出版信息

Iperception. 2018 Sep 3;9(5):2041669518795932. doi: 10.1177/2041669518795932. eCollection 2018 Sep-Oct.

Abstract

Some evolutionary psychologists have hypothesized that animals have priority in human attention. That is, they should be detected and selected more efficiently than other types of objects, especially man-made ones. Such a priority mechanism should automatically deploy more attentional resources and dynamic monitoring toward animal stimuli than nonanimals. Consequently, we postulated that variations of the and tasks should be particularly suitable paradigms for addressing the animate monitoring hypothesis, given their dynamic properties and dependency on divided attention. We used images of animals and artifacts and found neither a substantial sign of improvement in tracking the positions associated with animal stimuli nor a significant distracting effect of animals. We also failed to observe a significant prioritization in orders of response for positions associated with animals. While we observed an advantage for animals in event monitoring, this appeared to be dependent on properties of the task, as confirmed in further experiments. Moreover, we observed a small but inconclusive advantage for animals in identity accuracy. Thus, under certain conditions, some bias toward animals could be observed, but the evidence was weak and inconclusive. To conclude, effect sizes were generally small and not conclusively in favor of the expected attentional bias for animals. We found moderate to strong evidence that images of animals do not improve positional tracking, do not act as more effective distractors, are not selected prior to artifacts in the response phase, and are not easier to monitor for changes in size.

摘要

一些进化心理学家推测,动物在人类注意力中具有优先权。也就是说,与其他类型的物体,尤其是人造物体相比,它们应该能被更高效地检测和选择。这样一种优先机制应该会自动将更多的注意力资源和动态监测用于动物刺激而非非动物刺激。因此,鉴于其动态特性以及对注意力分配的依赖性,我们推测,[具体任务名称缺失]任务的变体应该是用于验证生物监测假设的特别合适的范式。我们使用了动物和人工制品的图像,结果发现,在跟踪与动物刺激相关的位置方面,既没有显著的改善迹象,动物也没有明显的干扰效应。我们也没有观察到在对与动物相关的位置的反应顺序上有显著的优先级。虽然我们在事件监测中观察到动物具有优势,但正如进一步实验所证实的,这似乎取决于任务的特性。此外,我们在识别准确性方面观察到动物有一个小但不确定的优势。因此,在某些条件下,可以观察到对动物的一些偏向,但证据薄弱且不具决定性。总之,效应大小通常较小,并没有确凿地支持预期的对动物的注意力偏向。我们发现有中等至有力的证据表明,动物图像并不能改善位置跟踪,不会成为更有效的干扰因素,在反应阶段不会先于人工制品被选中,并且在监测大小变化方面也并不更容易。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cbff/6124190/88be75285f63/10.1177_2041669518795932-fig1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验