ArticlePloS one2017
Salient object changes influence overt attentional prioritization and object-based targeting in natural scenes.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Narrative context shifts gaze from visual to semantic salience.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Social prioritisation in scene viewing and the effects of a spatial memory load.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024Article
- Salience-based object prioritization during active viewing of naturalistic scenes in young and older adults.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Turning the (virtual) world around: Patterns in saccade direction vary with picture orientation and shape in virtual reality.Journal of vision · 2020Article
- Center Bias Does Not Account for the Advantage of Meaning Over Salience in Attentional Guidance During Scene Viewing.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- The role of meaning in attentional guidance during free viewing of real-world scenes.Acta psychologica · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A change to an object in natural scenes attracts attention when it occurs during a fixation. However, when a change occurs during a saccade, and is masked by saccadic suppression, it typically does not capture the gaze in a bottom-up manner. In the present work, we investigated how the type and direction of salient changes to objects affect the prioritization and targeting of objects in natural scenes. We asked observers to look around a scene in preparation for a later memory test. After a period of time, an object in the scene was increased or decreased in salience either during a fixation (with a transient signal) or during a saccade (without transient signal), or it was not changed at all. Changes that were made during a fixation attracted the eyes both when the change involved an increase and a decrease in salience. However, changes that were made during a saccade only captured the eyes when the change was an increase in salience, relative to the baseline no-change condition. These results suggest that the prioritization of object changes can be influenced by the underlying salience of the changed object. In addition, object changes that occurred with a transient signal (which is itself a salient signal) resulted in more central object targeting. Taken together, our results suggest that salient signals in a natural scene are an important component in both object prioritization and targeting in natural scene viewing, insofar as they align with object locations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.