Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42864520›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2026

The temporal dynamics of semantic guidance in scenes.

Taylor R Hayes, John M Henderson

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Taylor R HayesCenter for Mind and Brain, University of California, Davis, 267 Cousteau Pl., Davis, CA, 95618, USA. trhayes@ucdavis.edu.
John M HendersonCenter for Mind and Brain, University of California, Davis, 267 Cousteau Pl., Davis, CA, 95618, USA.

Funding

Guiding Attention in Real-World ScenesR01EY027792 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI John M Henderson · 2017 to 2026
$2.5M
NEI NIH HHS R01EY027792
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When viewing a complex scene, the visual system must decide where to look among many potential targets. How this selection process unfolds over time-and whether it reflects changing semantic priorities-remains poorly understood. We tracked eye movements of 100 participants viewing 100 real-world scenes and modeled four distinct semantic features at each location: similarity to the scene category, similarity to other objects, similarity to the most recently fixated object, and local semantic intensity. Complementary Bayesian models of fixation likelihood and fixation onset time revealed that each feature follows a distinct temporal trajectory. Scene-category similarity and semantic intensity strongly predicted early fixations but weakened over time, consistent with rapid gist-derived guidance. Preference for semantically distinctive objects remained stable throughout viewing. Similarity to the previously fixated object showed a temporal reversal: relative to each scanpath's own baseline, semantically related regions were under-selected early and over-selected later. These dynamics were robust to controls for central viewing bias and distance to the previous fixation, ruling out purely spatial or oculomotor explanations. Together, these patterns suggest a shift from information maximization early in viewing, when attention prioritizes novel, non-redundant semantic content, to conceptual integration later, when attention is increasingly directed to semantically related elements. Rather than discrete processing stages, multiple semantic processes appear to operate in parallel with shifting weights over time, revealing how stored knowledge is associated with attention in complex scenes. OPEN PRACTICES STATEMENT: The scene stimuli, fixation data, semantic feature maps, fitted model outputs, and analysis code for reproducing all results are available on the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/7uspw . This study was not preregistered.

Indexed as

AttentionEye MovementsFixation, OcularPattern Recognition, VisualSemanticsAdultBayes TheoremEye-Tracking TechnologyFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultAttentionScene perceptionSemanticsTemporal dynamics

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.