Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Spatial separation between targets constrains maintenance of attention on multiple objects

  • Brief Reports
  • Published:
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Humans are limited in their ability to maintain multiple attentional foci. In attentive tracking of moving objects, performance declines as the number of tracked targets increases. Previous studies have interpreted such reduction in terms of a limit in the number of attentional foci. However, increasing the number of targets usually reduces spatial separation among different targets. In this study, we examine the role of target spatial separation in maintaining multiple attentional foci. Results from a multiple-object tracking task show that tracking accuracy deteriorates as the spatial separation between targets decreases. We propose that local interaction between nearby attentional foci modulates the resolution of attention, and that capacity limitation from attentive tracking originates in part from limitations in maintaining critical spacing among multiple attentional foci. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that tracking performance is limited not primarily by a number of locations, but by factors such as the spacing and speed of the targets and distractors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alvarez, G. A., & Cavanagh, P. (2005). Independent resources for attentional tracking in the left and right visual hemifields. Psychological Science, 16, 637–643.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Awh, E., & Pashler, H. (2000). Evidence for split attentional foci. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 834–846.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bahcall, D. O., & Kowler, E. (1999). Attentional interference at small spatial separations. Vision Research, 39, 71–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bouma, H. (1970). Interaction effects in parafoveal letter recognition. Nature, 226, 177–178.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, T. A., Alvarez, G. A., & Cavanagh, P. (2007). Quadrantic deficit reveals anatomical constraints on selection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104, 13496–13500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cutzu, F., & Tsotsos, J. K. (2003). The selective tuning model of attention: Psychophysical evidence for a suppressive annulus around an attended item. Vision Research, 43, 205–219.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dehaene, S. (1997). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • He, S., Cavanagh, P., & Intriligator, J. (1996). Attentional resolution and the locus of visual awareness. Nature, 383, 334–337.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Intriligator, J., & Cavanagh, P. (2001). The spatial resolution of visual attention. Cognitive Psychology, 43, 171–216.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kastner, S., De Weerd, P., Pinsk, M. A., Elizondo, M. I., Desimone, R., & Ungerleider, L. G. (2001). Modulation of sensory suppression: Im-plications for receptive field sizes in the human visual cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology, 86, 1398–1411.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luck, S. J., & Vogel, E. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390, 279–281.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, N. G., Mollenhauer, M., Rösler, A., & Kleinschmidt, A. (2005). The attentional field has a Mexican hat distribution. Vision Research, 45, 1129–1137.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parkes, L., Lund, J., Angelucci, A., Solomon, J. A., & Morgan, M. (2001). Compulsory averaging of crowded orientation signals in human vision. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 739–744.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pelli, D. G., Cavanagh, P., Desimone, R., Tjan, B., & Treisman, A. (2007). Crowding: Including illusory conjunctions, surround suppression, and attention. Journal of Vision, 7(2), i.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelli, D. G., Palomares, M., & Majaj, N. J. (2004). Crowding is unlike ordinary masking: Distinguishing feature integration from detection. Journal of Vision, 4, 1136–1169.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pylyshyn, Z. W., & Storm, R. W. (1988). Tracking multiple independent targets: Evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. Spatial Vision, 3, 179–197.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Won Mok Shim & Yuhong V. Jiang

  2. MIT, 77 Mass. Ave., Building 46-4141, 02139, Cambridge, MA

    Won Mok Shim & George A. Alvarez

  3. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota

    Yuhong V. Jiang

Authors
  1. Won Mok Shim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. George A. Alvarez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yuhong V. Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Won Mok Shim.

Additional information

This study was supported by NIH Grant 071788, NSF Grant 0733764, and ONR Grant YIP2005 to Y.V.J. and NIH Grant EY016982 to G.A.A.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shim, W.M., Alvarez, G.A. & Jiang, Y.V. Spatial separation between targets constrains maintenance of attention on multiple objects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 15, 390–397 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.2.390

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.2.390

Keywords

Search

Navigation