Department of Psychology.
School of Psychology, University of Queensland.
Emotion. 2020 Mar;20(2):206-216. doi: 10.1037/emo0000536. Epub 2019 Feb 7.
The visual search paradigm has been used in emotion research to examine the relation between facial expressions of emotion and attention. Here, the better performance in a search for one facial expression category (e.g., a happy face) compared to a second category (e.g., an angry face) has been often interpreted as indicating better guidance of attention. Better guidance of attention in turn indicates that some aspect of the facial expression can be used preattentively, that is, while focused attention is directed elsewhere in the visual field. This view has been criticized because better performance may also mean better distractor rejection independently of guidance. The present study uses eye tracking to disentangle the two variables. The results show better search performance with a happy than angry face as the target. Facial emotion also influenced the time the eyes fixated a stimulus (dwelling), but not guidance related variables of search performance. A linear regression moreover showed that dwelling accounted for large amounts of variance in the overall search times. Overall, the results present clear-cut evidence that differential search performance does not need to indicate differential guidance, but may also be explained by postselective factors that influence the dwelling on stimuli. The broader implication of this demonstration is that results from the visual search paradigm have to be interpreted with caution, and that better search performance cannot be directly interpreted as an indicator of preattentive guidance of attention. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
视觉搜索范式已被用于情感研究,以检验面部表情与注意力之间的关系。在这里,与第二种表情(例如愤怒的表情)相比,人们在搜索一种表情类别(例如,快乐的表情)时表现更好,这通常被解释为表明注意力更好地得到了引导。反过来,注意力更好地引导表明,面部表情的某些方面可以被预先注意到,即在将焦点注意力集中在视野中的其他地方时。这种观点受到了批评,因为表现更好也可能意味着在不依赖于引导的情况下更好地拒绝干扰。本研究使用眼动追踪来区分这两个变量。结果表明,与愤怒的面孔相比,快乐的面孔作为目标时,搜索性能更好。面部表情也影响眼睛注视刺激物的时间(停留时间),但不影响搜索性能的引导相关变量。此外,线性回归显示,停留时间解释了整体搜索时间的大量方差。总的来说,结果提供了明确的证据,表明不同的搜索表现不一定表示不同的引导,也可以通过影响对刺激物的停留时间的后选择因素来解释。这一演示的更广泛意义是,必须谨慎解释视觉搜索范式的结果,并且不能直接将更好的搜索表现解释为注意力预先引导的指标。(APA 版权所有,2020)。