Humans can efficiently look for but not select multiple visual objects
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Utrecht University, Netherlands
- 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.
-
Data from: Humans can efficiently look for but not select multiple visual objectsOpen Science Framework, 3bn64.
Article and author information
Author details
Johannes Jacobus Fahrenfort
Christian N L Olivers
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
- 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
- Received: June 7, 2019
- Accepted: August 26, 2019
- Accepted Manuscript published: August 27, 2019 (version 1)
- 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
-
- 1,649
- views
-
- 269
- downloads
-
- 21
- 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)
Humans can efficiently look for but not select multiple visual objects
eLife 8:e49130.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.49130
Further reading
-
- Genetics and Genomics
- Neuroscience
Single-cell RNA sequencing reveals the extent to which marmosets carry genetically distinct cells from their siblings.
-
- Neuroscience
We are unresponsive during slow-wave sleep but continue monitoring external events for survival. Our brain wakens us when danger is imminent. If events are non-threatening, our brain might store them for later consideration to improve decision-making. To test this hypothesis, we examined whether novel vocabulary consisting of simultaneously played pseudowords and translation words are encoded/stored during sleep, and which neural-electrical events facilitate encoding/storage. An algorithm for brain-state-dependent stimulation selectively targeted word pairs to slow-wave peaks or troughs. Retrieval tests were given 12 and 36 hr later. These tests required decisions regarding the semantic category of previously sleep-played pseudowords. The sleep-played vocabulary influenced awake decision-making 36 hr later, if targeted to troughs. The words’ linguistic processing raised neural complexity. The words’ semantic-associative encoding was supported by increased theta power during the ensuing peak. Fast-spindle power ramped up during a second peak likely aiding consolidation. Hence, new vocabulary played during slow-wave sleep was stored and influenced decision-making days later.
