Humans can efficiently look for but not select multiple visual objects

  1. Eduard Ort  Is a corresponding author
  2. Johannes Jacobus Fahrenfort
  3. Tuomas ten Cate
  4. Martin Eimer
  5. Christian N L Olivers
  1. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Netherlands
  2. Utrecht University, Netherlands
  3. Birkbeck College, University of London, United Kingdom

Abstract

The human brain recurrently prioritizes task-relevant over task-irrelevant visual information. A central, question is whether multiple objects can be prioritized simultaneously. To answer this, we let observers search for two colored targets among distractors. Crucially, we independently varied the number of target colors that observers anticipated, and the number of target colors actually used to distinguish the targets in the display. This enabled us to dissociate the preparation of selection mechanisms from the actual engagement of such mechanisms. Multivariate classification of electroencephalographic activity allowed us to track selection of each target separately across time. The results revealed only small neural and behavioral costs associated with preparing for selecting two objects, but substantial costs when engaging in selection. Further analyses suggest this cost is the consequence of neural competition resulting in limited parallel processing, rather than a serial bottleneck. The findings bridge diverging theoretical perspectives on capacity limitations of feature-based attention.

Data availability

All data and material will be made freely accessible at https://osf.io/3bn64.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Eduard Ort

    Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    For correspondence
    eduardxort@gmail.com
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5546-3561
  2. Johannes Jacobus Fahrenfort

    Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9025-3436
  3. Tuomas ten Cate

    Experimental Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Martin Eimer

    Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck College, University of London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Christian N L Olivers

    Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7470-5378

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (464-13-003)

  • Christian N L Olivers

H2020 European Research Council (ERC-2013-CoG-615423)

  • Christian N L Olivers

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Huan Luo, Peking University, China

Ethics

Human subjects: All participants gave written informed consent in line with the Declaration of Helsinki. The study was approved by the Scientific and Ethics Review Board of the Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (Reference number: VCWE-2016-215).

Version history

  1. Received: June 7, 2019
  2. Accepted: August 26, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: August 27, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: September 9, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2019, Ort et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,671
    views
  • 274
    downloads
  • 22
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Eduard Ort
  2. Johannes Jacobus Fahrenfort
  3. Tuomas ten Cate
  4. Martin Eimer
  5. Christian N L Olivers
(2019)
Humans can efficiently look for but not select multiple visual objects
eLife 8:e49130.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.49130

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.49130

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Zilu Liang, Simeng Wu ... Chao Liu
    Research Article

    People form impressions about others during daily social encounters and infer personality traits from others' behaviors. Such trait inference is thought to rely on two universal dimensions: competence and warmth. These two dimensions can be used to construct a ‘social cognitive map’ organizing massive information obtained from social encounters efficiently. Originating from spatial cognition, the neural codes supporting the representation and navigation of spatial cognitive maps have been widely studied. Recent studies suggest similar neural mechanism subserves the map-like architecture in social cognition as well. Here we investigated how spatial codes operate beyond the physical environment and support the representation and navigation of social cognitive map. We designed a social value space defined by two dimensions of competence and warmth. Behaviorally, participants were able to navigate to a learned location from random starting locations in this abstract social space. At the neural level, we identified the representation of distance in the precuneus, fusiform gyrus, and middle occipital gyrus. We also found partial evidence of grid-like representation patterns in the medial prefrontal cortex and entorhinal cortex. Moreover, the intensity of grid-like response scaled with the performance of navigating in social space and social avoidance trait scores. Our findings suggest a neurocognitive mechanism by which social information can be organized into a structured representation, namely cognitive map and its relevance to social well-being.

    1. Neuroscience
    Alina Tetereva, Narun Pat
    Research Article

    One well-known biomarker candidate that supposedly helps capture fluid cognition is Brain Age, or a predicted value based on machine-learning models built to predict chronological age from brain MRI. To formally evaluate the utility of Brain Age for capturing fluid cognition, we built 26 age-prediction models for Brain Age based on different combinations of MRI modalities, using the Human Connectome Project in Aging (n=504, 36–100 years old). First, based on commonality analyses, we found a large overlap between Brain Age and chronological age: Brain Age could uniquely add only around 1.6% in explaining variation in fluid cognition over and above chronological age. Second, the age-prediction models that performed better at predicting chronological age did NOT necessarily create better Brain Age for capturing fluid cognition over and above chronological age. Instead, better-performing age-prediction models created Brain Age that overlapped larger with chronological age, up to around 29% out of 32%, in explaining fluid cognition. Third, Brain Age missed around 11% of the total variation in fluid cognition that could have been explained by the brain variation. That is, directly predicting fluid cognition from brain MRI data (instead of relying on Brain Age and chronological age) could lead to around a 1/3-time improvement of the total variation explained. Accordingly, we demonstrated the limited utility of Brain Age as a biomarker for fluid cognition and made some suggestions to ensure the utility of Brain Age in explaining fluid cognition and other phenotypes of interest.