Interactive Multiple Object Tracking (iMOT)

被引:17
作者
Thornton, Ian M. [1 ,2 ]
Buelthoff, Heinrich H. [3 ,4 ]
Horowitz, Todd S. [5 ,6 ]
Rynning, Aksel [2 ]
Lee, Seong-Whan [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Malta, Dept Cognit Sci, Msida, Malta
[2] Swansea Univ, Dept Psychol, Swansea, W Glam, Wales
[3] Max Planck Inst Biol Cybernet, D-72076 Tubingen, Germany
[4] Korea Univ, Dept Brain & Cognit Engn, Seoul, South Korea
[5] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Visual Attent Lab, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[6] Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Dept Ophthalmol, Boston, MA USA
来源
PLOS ONE | 2014年 / 9卷 / 02期
基金
新加坡国家研究基金会;
关键词
DIVIDED ATTENTION; VISUAL-ATTENTION; PERCEPTION; INFORMATION; LOCATION; MODEL; DISTRACTION; SELECTION; DRIVEN; SPEED;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0086974
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
We introduce a new task for exploring the relationship between action and attention. In this interactive multiple object tracking (iMOT) task, implemented as an iPad app, participants were presented with a display of multiple, visually identical disks which moved independently. The task was to prevent any collisions during a fixed duration. Participants could perturb object trajectories via the touchscreen. In Experiment 1, we used a staircase procedure to measure the ability to control moving objects. Object speed was set to 1 degrees/s. On average participants could control 8.4 items without collision. Individual control strategies were quite variable, but did not predict overall performance. In Experiment 2, we compared iMOT with standard MOT performance using identical displays. Object speed was set to 2 degrees/s. Participants could reliably control more objects (M = 6.6) than they could track (M = 4.0), but performance in the two tasks was positively correlated. In Experiment 3, we used a dual-task design. Compared to single-task baseline, iMOT performance decreased and MOT performance increased when the two tasks had to be completed together. Overall, these findings suggest: 1) There is a clear limit to the number of items that can be simultaneously controlled, for a given speed and display density; 2) participants can control more items than they can track; 3) task-relevant action appears not to disrupt MOT performance in the current experimental context.
引用
收藏
页数:19
相关论文
共 49 条
[1]   How many objects can you track? Evidence for a resource-limited attentive tracking mechanism [J].
Alvarez, George A. ;
Franconeri, Steven L. .
JOURNAL OF VISION, 2007, 7 (13)
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2010, Effortless attention: A new perspective in the cognitive science of attention and action, DOI DOI 10.7551/MITPRESS/9780262013840.003.0006
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2009, HUM FACTORS
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1980, Attention and Performance
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1987, PERSPECTIVES PERCEPT
[6]   Prediction processes during multiple object tracking (MOT): involvement of dorsal and ventral premotor cortices [J].
Atmaca, Silke ;
Stadler, Waltraud ;
Keitel, Anne ;
Ott, Derek V. M. ;
Lepsien, Joeran ;
Prinz, Wolfgang .
BRAIN AND BEHAVIOR, 2013, 3 (06) :683-700
[7]   Close encounters of the distracting kind: Identifying the cause of visual tracking errors [J].
Bae, Gi Yeul ;
Flombaum, Jonathan I. .
ATTENTION PERCEPTION & PSYCHOPHYSICS, 2012, 74 (04) :703-715
[8]   Visual search is modulated by action intentions [J].
Bekkering, H ;
Neggers, SFW .
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2002, 13 (04) :370-374
[9]   Effects of target enhancement and distractor suppression on multiple object tracking capacity [J].
Bettencourt, Katherine C. ;
Somers, David C. .
JOURNAL OF VISION, 2009, 9 (07)
[10]   Cultural Differences in Allocation of Attention in Visual Information Processing [J].
Boduroglu, Aysecan ;
Shah, Priti ;
Nisbett, Richard E. .
JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2009, 40 (03) :349-360