Tracking multiple objects is limited only by object spacing, not by speed, time, or capacity

Multiple-object Tracking as a Tool for Parametrically Modulating Memory Reactivation

Converging evidence supports the "nonmonotonic plasticity" hypothesis, which states that although complete retrieval may strengthen memories, partial retrieval weakens them. Yet, the classic experimental paradigms used to study effects of partial retrieval are not ideally suited to doing so, because they lack the parametric control needed to ensure that the memory is activated to the appropriate degree (i.e., that there is some retrieval but not enough to cause memory strengthening). Here, we present a novel procedure designed to accommodate this need. After participants learned a list of word-scene associates, they completed a cued mental visualization task that was combined with a multiple-object tracking (MOT) procedure, which we selected for its ability to interfere with mental visualization in a parametrically adjustable way (by varying the number of MOT targets). We also used fMRI data to successfully train an "associative recall" classifier for use in this task: This classifier revealed greater memory reactivation during trials in which associative memories were cued while participants tracked one, rather than five, MOT targets. However, the classifier was insensitive to task difficulty when recall was not taking place, suggesting that it had indeed tracked memory reactivation rather than task difficulty per se. Consistent with the classifier findings, participants' introspective ratings of visualization vividness were modulated by MOT task difficulty. In addition, we observed reduced classifier output and slowing of responses in a postreactivation memory test, consistent with the hypothesis that partial reactivation, induced by MOT, weakened memory. These results serve as a "proof of concept" that MOT can be used to parametrically modulate memory retrieval-a property that may prove useful in future investigation of partial retrieval effects, for example, in closed-loop experiments.

Multiple event monitoring

Suppose you were monitoring a group of people in order to determine if anyone of them did something suspicious (e.g., putting down a bag) or if any two interacted in a suspicious manner (e.g., trading bags). How large a group could you monitor successfully? This paper reports on six experiments in which observers monitor a group of entities, watching for an event. Whether the event was performed by a single entity or was an interaction between a pair, the capacity for event monitoring was two to three items. This was lower than the multiple object tracking capacity for the same stimuli (approximately six items). Capacity was essentially the same whether entities were identical circles or unique cartoon animals; nor was capacity changed by an added requirement to identify the entities involved in an event. Event monitoring appears to be related to, but not identical to, multiple object tracking.

The Effects of Visual Discriminability and Rotation Angle on 30-Month-Olds' Search Performance in Spatial Rotation Tasks

Tracking objects that are hidden and then moved is a crucial ability related to object permanence, which develops across several stages in early childhood. In spatial rotation tasks, children observe a target object that is hidden in one of two or more containers before the containers are rotated around a fixed axis. Usually, 30-month-olds fail to find the hidden object after it was rotated by 180°. We examined whether visual discriminability of the containers improves 30-month-olds’ success in this task and whether children perform better after 90° than after 180° rotations. Two potential hiding containers with same or different colors were placed on a board that was rotated by 90° or 180° in a within-subjects design. Children (N = 29) performed above chance level in all four conditions. Their overall success in finding the object did not improve by differently colored containers. However, different colors prevented children from showing an inhibition bias in 90° rotations, that is, choosing the empty container more often when it was located close to them than when it was farther away: This bias emerged in the same colors condition but not in the different colors condition. Results are discussed in view of particular challenges that might facilitate or deteriorate spatial rotation tasks for young children.

All eyes on relevance: strategic allocation of attention as a result of feature-based task demands in multiple object tracking

Multiple object tracking (MOT) plays a fundamental role in processing and interpreting dynamic environments. Regarding the type of information utilized by the observer, recent studies reported evidence for the use of object features in an automatic, low- level manner. By introducing a novel paradigm that allowed us to combine tracking with a noninterfering top-down task, we tested whether a voluntary component can regulate the deployment of attention to task-relevant features in a selective manner. In four experiments we found conclusive evidence for a task-driven selection mechanism that guides attention during tracking: The observers were able to ignore or prioritize distinct objects. They marked the distinct (cued) object (target/distractor) more or less often than other objects of the same type (targets /distractors)-but only when they had received an identification task that required them to actively process object features (cues) during tracking. These effects are discussed with regard to existing theoretical approaches to attentive tracking, gaze-cue usability as well as attentional readiness, a term that originally stems from research on attention capture and visual search. Our findings indicate that existing theories of MOT need to be adjusted to allow for flexible top-down, voluntary processing during tracking.

Visuospatial Attention to Single and Multiple Objects Is Independently Impaired in Parkinson's Disease

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is associated with deficits in visuospatial attention. It is as yet unknown whether these attentional deficits begin at a perceptual level or instead reflect disruptions in oculomotor or higher-order processes. In the present study, non-demented individuals with PD and matched normal control adults (NC) participated in two tasks requiring sustained visuospatial attention, both based on a multiple object tracking paradigm. Eye tracking was used to ensure central fixation. In Experiment 1 (26 PD, 21 NC), a pair of identical red dots (one target, one distractor) rotated randomly for three seconds at varied speeds. The task was to maintain the identity of the sole target, which was labeled prior to each trial. PD were less accurate than NC overall (p = .049). When considering only trials where fixation was maintained, however, there was no significant group difference, suggesting that the deficit’s origin is closely related to oculomotor processing. To determine whether PD had additional impairment in multifocal attention, in Experiment 2 (25 PD, 15 NC), two targets were presented along with distractors at a moderate speed, along with a control condition in which dots remained stationary. PD were less accurate than NC for moving (p = 0.02) but not stationary targets. This group difference remained significant when considering only trials where fixation was maintained, suggesting the source of the PD deficit was independent from oculomotor processing. Taken together, the results implicate separate mechanisms for single vs. multiple object tracking deficits in PD.

Attention Modulates Spatial Precision in Multiple-Object Tracking

We present a computational model of multiple-object tracking that makes trial-level predictions about the allocation of visual attention and the effect of this allocation on observers' ability to track multiple objects simultaneously. This model follows the intuition that increased attention to a location increases the spatial resolution of its internal representation. Using a combination of empirical and computational experiments, we demonstrate the existence of a tight coupling between cognitive and perceptual resources in this task: Low-level tracking of objects generates bottom-up predictions of error likelihood, and high-level attention allocation selectively reduces error probabilities in attended locations while increasing it at non-attended locations. Whereas earlier models of multiple-object tracking have predicted the big picture relationship between stimulus complexity and response accuracy, our approach makes accurate predictions of both the macro-scale effect of target number and velocity on tracking difficulty and micro-scale variations in difficulty across individual trials and targets arising from the idiosyncratic within-trial interactions of targets and distractors.

Near or far: The effect of spatial distance and vocabulary knowledge on word learning

The current study investigated the role of spatial distance in word learning. Two-year-old children saw three novel objects named while the objects were either in close proximity to each other or spatially separated. Children were then tested on their retention for the name-object associations. Keeping the objects spatially separated from each other during naming was associated with increased retention for children with larger vocabularies. Children with a lower vocabulary size demonstrated better retention if they saw objects in close proximity to each other during naming. This demonstrates that keeping a clear view of objects during naming improves word learning for children who have already learned many words, but keeping objects within close proximal range is better for children at earlier stages of vocabulary acquisition. The effect of distance is therefore not equal across varying vocabulary sizes. The influences of visual crowding, cognitive load, and vocabulary size on word learning are discussed.

Position tracking and identity tracking are separate systems: Evidence from eye movements

How do we track multiple moving objects in our visual environment? Some investigators argue that tracking is based on a parallel mechanism (e.g., Cavanagh & Alvarez, 2005; Pylyshyn, 1989), others argue that tracking contains a serial component (e.g. Holcombe & Chen, 2013; Oksama & Hyönä, 2008). In the present study, we put previous theories into a direct test by registering observers' eye movements when they tracked identical moving targets (the MOT task) or when they tracked distinct object identities (the MIT task). The eye movement technique is a useful tool to study whether overt focal attention is exploited during tracking. We found a qualitative difference between these tasks in terms of eye movements. When the participants tracked only position information (MOT), the observers had a clear preference for keeping their eyes fixed for a rather long time on the same screen position. In contrast, active eye behavior was observed when the observers tracked the identities of moving objects (MIT). The participants updated over four target identities with overt attention shifts. These data suggest that there are two separate systems involved in multiple object tracking. The position tracking system keeps track of the positions of the moving targets in parallel without the need of overt attention shifts in the form of eye movements. On the other hand, the identity tracking system maintains identity-location bindings in a serial fashion by utilizing overt attention shifts.

Sustained Splits of Attention within versus across Visual Hemifields Produce Distinct Spatial Gain Profiles

Visual attention can be focused concurrently on two stimuli at noncontiguous locations while intermediate stimuli remain ignored. Nevertheless, behavioral performance in multifocal attention tasks falters when attended stimuli fall within one visual hemifield as opposed to when they are distributed across left and right hemifields. This "different-hemifield advantage" has been ascribed to largely independent processing capacities of each cerebral hemisphere in early visual cortices. Here, we investigated how this advantage influences the sustained division of spatial attention. We presented six isoeccentric light-emitting diodes (LEDs) in the lower visual field, each flickering at a different frequency. Participants attended to two LEDs that were spatially separated by an intermediate LED and responded to synchronous events at to-be-attended LEDs. Task-relevant pairs of LEDs were either located in the same hemifield ("within-hemifield" conditions) or separated by the vertical meridian ("across-hemifield" conditions). Flicker-driven brain oscillations, steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEPs), indexed the allocation of attention to individual LEDs. Both behavioral performance and SSVEPs indicated enhanced processing of attended LED pairs during "across-hemifield" relative to "within-hemifield" conditions. Moreover, SSVEPs demonstrated effective filtering of intermediate stimuli in "across-hemifield" condition only. Thus, despite identical physical distances between LEDs of attended pairs, the spatial profiles of gain effects differed profoundly between "across-hemifield" and "within-hemifield" conditions. These findings corroborate that early cortical visual processing stages rely on hemisphere-specific processing capacities and highlight their limiting role in the concurrent allocation of visual attention to multiple locations.

The Effect of Fearful Expressions on Multiple Face Tracking

How does the visual system realize dynamic tracking? This topic has become popular within cognitive science in recent years. The classical theory argues that multiple object tracking is accomplished via pre-attention visual indexes as part of a cognitively impenetrable low-level visual system. The present research aimed to investigate whether and how tracking processes are influenced by facial expressions that convey abundant social information about one’s mental state and situated environment. The results showed that participants tracked fearful faces more effectively than neutral faces. However, this advantage was only present under the low-attentional load condition, and distractor face emotion did not impact tracking performance. These findings imply that visual tracking is not driven entirely by low-level vision and encapsulated by high-level representations; rather, that facial expressions, a kind of social information, are able to influence dynamic tracking. Furthermore, the effect of fearful expressions on multiple face tracking is mediated by the availability of attentional resources.

Distractor Locations Influence Multiple Object Tracking Beyond Interobject Spacing: Evidence From Equidistant Distractor Displacements

Human observers are able to keep track of several independently moving objects among other objects. Within theories of multiple object tracking (MOT), distractors are assumed to influence tracking performance only by their distance toward the next target. In order to test this assumption, we designed a variant of the MOT paradigm that involved spatially arranged target-distractor pairs and sudden displacements of distractors during a brief flash. Critically, these displacements maintained target-distractor spacing. Our results show that displacing distractors hurts tracking performance (Experiment 1). Importantly, target-distractor confusions occur within target-distractor pairs with displaced distractors (Experiment 2). This displacement effect increases with an increasing displacement angle (Experiment 3) but is equal at different distances between target and distractor (Experiment 4). This finding illustrates that distractors influence tracking performance beyond pure interobject spacing. We discuss how inhibitory processes as well as relations between targets and distractors might interfere with target tracking.

The Identity-Location Binding Problem

The binding problem is fundamental to visual perception. It is the problem of associating an object's visual properties with itself and not with some other object. The problem is made particular difficult because different properties of an object, such as its color, shape, size, and motion, are often processed independently, sometimes in different cortical areas. The results of these separate analyses have to be combined before the object can be seen as a single coherent entity as opposed to a collection of unconnected features. Visual bindings are typically initiated and updated in a serial fashion, one object at a time. Here, we show that one type of binding, location-identity bindings, can be updated in parallel. We do this by using two complementary techniques, the simultaneous-sequential paradigm and systems factorial technology. These techniques make different assumptions and rely on different behavioral measures, yet both came to the same conclusion.

The Not-so-Staggering Effect of Staggered Animated Transitions on Visual Tracking

Interactive visual applications often rely on animation to transition from one display state to another. There are multiple animation techniques to choose from, and it is not always clear which should produce the best visual correspondences between display elements. One major factor is whether the animation relies on staggering-an incremental delay in start times across the moving elements. It has been suggested that staggering may reduce occlusion, while also reducing display complexity and producing less overwhelming animations, though no empirical evidence has demonstrated these advantages. Work in perceptual psychology does show that reducing occlusion, and reducing inter-object proximity (crowding) more generally, improves performance in multiple object tracking. We ran simulations confirming that staggering can in some cases reduce crowding in animated transitions involving dot clouds (as found in, e.g., animated 2D scatterplots). We empirically evaluated the effect of two staggering techniques on tracking tasks, focusing on cases that should most favour staggering. We found that introducing staggering has a negligible, or even negative, impact on multiple object tracking performance. The potential benefits of staggering may be outweighed by strong costs: a loss of common-motion grouping information about which objects travel in similar paths, and less predictability about when any specific object would begin to move. Staggering may be beneficial in some conditions, but they have yet to be demonstrated. The present results are a significant step toward a better understanding of animation pacing, and provide direction for further research.

Why do people appear not to extrapolate trajectories during multiple object tracking? A computational investigation

Intuitively, extrapolating object trajectories should make visual tracking more accurate. This has proven to be true in many contexts that involve tracking a single item. But surprisingly, when tracking multiple identical items in what is known as "multiple object tracking," observers often appear to ignore direction of motion, relying instead on basic spatial memory. We investigated potential reasons for this behavior through probabilistic models that were endowed with perceptual limitations in the range of typical human observers, including noisy spatial perception. When we compared a model that weights its extrapolations relative to other sources of information about object position, and one that does not extrapolate at all, we found no reliable difference in performance, belying the intuition that extrapolation always benefits tracking. In follow-up experiments we found this to be true for a variety of models that weight observations and predictions in different ways; in some cases we even observed worse performance for models that use extrapolations compared to a model that does not at all. Ultimately, the best performing models either did not extrapolate, or extrapolated very conservatively, relying heavily on observations. These results illustrate the difficulty and attendant hazards of using noisy inputs to extrapolate the trajectories of multiple objects simultaneously in situations with targets and featurally confusable nontargets.

Processing multiple visual objects is limited by overlap in neural channels

High-level visual categories (e.g., faces, bodies, scenes, and objects) have separable neural representations across the visual cortex. Here, we show that this division of neural resources affects the ability to simultaneously process multiple items. In a behavioral task, we found that performance was superior when items were drawn from different categories (e.g., two faces/two scenes) compared to when items were drawn from one category (e.g., four faces). The magnitude of this mixed-category benefit depended on which stimulus categories were paired together (e.g., faces and scenes showed a greater behavioral benefit than objects and scenes). Using functional neuroimaging (i.e., functional MRI), we showed that the size of the mixed-category benefit was predicted by the amount of separation between neural response patterns, particularly within occipitotemporal cortex. These results suggest that the ability to process multiple items at once is limited by the extent to which those items are represented by separate neural populations.

Resource demands of object tracking and differential allocation of the resource

The attentional processes for tracking moving objects may be largely hemisphere-specific. Indeed, in our first two experiments the maximum object speed (speed limit) for tracking targets in one visual hemifield (left or right) was not significantly affected by a requirement to track additional targets in the other hemifield. When the additional targets instead occupied the same hemifield as the original targets, the speed limit was reduced. At slow target speeds, however, adding a second target to the same hemifield had little effect. At high target speeds, the cost of adding a same-hemifield second target was approximately as large as would occur if observers could only track one of the targets. This shows that performance with a fast-moving target is very sensitive to the amount of resource allocated. In a third experiment, we investigated whether the resources for tracking can be distributed unequally between two targets. The speed limit for a given target was higher if the second target was slow rather than fast, suggesting that more resource was allocated to the faster of the two targets. This finding was statistically significant only for targets presented in the same hemifield, consistent with the theory of independent resources in the two hemifields. Some limited evidence was also found for resource sharing across hemifields, suggesting that attentional tracking resources may not be entirely hemifield-specific. Together, these experiments indicate that the largely hemisphere-specific tracking resource can be differentially allocated to faster targets.

Artificially created stimuli produced by a genetic algorithm using a saliency model as its fitness function show that Inattentional Blindness modulates performance in a pop-out visual search paradigm

Salient stimuli are more readily detected than less salient stimuli, and individual differences in such detection may be relevant to why some people fail to notice an unexpected stimulus that appears in their visual field whereas others do notice it. This failure to notice unexpected stimuli is termed 'Inattentional Blindness' and is more likely to occur when we are engaged in a resource-consuming task. A genetic algorithm is described in which artificial stimuli are created using a saliency model as its fitness function. These generated stimuli, which vary in their saliency level, are used in two studies that implement a pop-out visual search task to evaluate the power of the model to discriminate the performance of people who were and were not Inattentionally Blind (IB). In one study the number of orientational filters in the model was increased to check if discriminatory power and the saliency estimation for low-level images could be improved. Results show that the performance of the model does improve when additional filters are included, leading to the conclusion that low-level images may require a higher number of orientational filters for the model to better predict participants' performance. In both studies we found that given the same target patch image (i.e. same saliency value) IB individuals take longer to identify a target compared to non-IB individuals. This suggests that IB individuals require a higher level of saliency for low-level visual features in order to identify target patches.

Interactive multiple object tracking (iMOT)

We introduce a new task for exploring the relationship between action and attention. In this interactive multiple object tracking (iMOT) task, implemented as an iPad app, participants were presented with a display of multiple, visually identical disks which moved independently. The task was to prevent any collisions during a fixed duration. Participants could perturb object trajectories via the touchscreen. In Experiment 1, we used a staircase procedure to measure the ability to control moving objects. Object speed was set to 1°/s. On average participants could control 8.4 items without collision. Individual control strategies were quite variable, but did not predict overall performance. In Experiment 2, we compared iMOT with standard MOT performance using identical displays. Object speed was set to 2°/s. Participants could reliably control more objects (M = 6.6) than they could track (M = 4.0), but performance in the two tasks was positively correlated. In Experiment 3, we used a dual-task design. Compared to single-task baseline, iMOT performance decreased and MOT performance increased when the two tasks had to be completed together. Overall, these findings suggest: 1) There is a clear limit to the number of items that can be simultaneously controlled, for a given speed and display density; 2) participants can control more items than they can track; 3) task-relevant action appears not to disrupt MOT performance in the current experimental context.

Multiple object tracking in autism spectrum disorders

Difficulties in visual attention are often implicated in autism spectrum disorders (ASD) but it remains unclear which aspects of attention are affected. Here, we used a multiple object tracking (MOT) task to quantitatively characterize dynamic attentional function in children with ASD aged 5-12. While the ASD group performed significantly worse overall, the group difference did not increase with increased object speed. This finding suggests that decreased MOT performance is not due to deficits in dynamic attention but instead to a diminished capacity to select and maintain attention on multiple targets. Further, MOT performance improved from 5 to 10 years in both typical and ASD groups with similar developmental trajectories. These results argue against a specific deficit in dynamic attention in ASD.

Speed has an effect on multiple-object tracking independently of the number of close encounters between targets and distractors

Multiple-object tracking (MOT) studies have shown that tracking ability declines as object speed increases. However, this might be attributed solely to the increased number of times that target and distractor objects usually pass close to each other ("close encounters") when speed is increased, resulting in more target-distractor confusions. The present study investigates whether speed itself affects MOT ability by using displays in which the number of close encounters is held constant across speeds. Observers viewed several pairs of disks, and each pair rotated about the pair's midpoint and, also, about the center of the display at varying speeds. Results showed that even with the number of close encounters held constant across speeds, increased speed impairs tracking performance, and the effect of speed is greater when the number of targets to be tracked is large. Moreover, neither the effect of number of distractors nor the effect of target-distractor distance was dependent on speed, when speed was isolated from the typical concomitant increase in close encounters. These results imply that increased speed does not impair tracking solely by increasing close encounters. Rather, they support the view that speed affects MOT capacity by requiring more attentional resources to track at higher speeds.

Automatic feature-based grouping during multiple object tracking

Contour interpolation automatically binds targets with distractors to impair multiple object tracking (Keane, Mettler, Tsoi, & Kellman, 2011). Is interpolation special in this regard or can other features produce the same effect? To address this question, we examined the influence of eight features on tracking: color, contrast polarity, orientation, size, shape, depth, interpolation, and a combination (shape, color, size). In each case, subjects tracked 4 of 8 objects that began as undifferentiated shapes, changed features as motion began (to enable grouping), and returned to their undifferentiated states before halting. We found that intertarget grouping improved performance for all feature types except orientation and interpolation (Experiment 1 and Experiment 2). Most importantly, target-distractor grouping impaired performance for color, size, shape, combination, and interpolation. The impairments were, at times, large (>15% decrement in accuracy) and occurred relative to a homogeneous condition in which all objects had the same features at each moment of a trial (Experiment 2), and relative to a "diversity" condition in which targets and distractors had different features at each moment (Experiment 3). We conclude that feature-based grouping occurs for a variety of features besides interpolation, even when irrelevant to task instructions and contrary to the task demands, suggesting that interpolation is not unique in promoting automatic grouping in tracking tasks. Our results also imply that various kinds of features are encoded automatically and in parallel during tracking.

Interobject spacing explains the attentional bias toward interacting objects

Spatio-temporal interactions between simple geometrical shapes typically elicit strong impressions of intentionality. Recent research has started to explore the link between attentional processes and the detection of interacting objects. Here, we asked whether visual attention is biased toward such interactions. We investigated probe discrimination performance in algorithmically generated animations that involved two chasing objects and two randomly moving objects. In Experiment 1, we observed a pronounced attention capture effect for chasing objects. Because reduced interobject spacing is an inherent feature of interacting objects, in Experiment 2 we designed randomly moving objects that were matched to the chasing objects with respect to interobject spacing at probe onset. In this experiment, the capture effect attenuated completely. Therefore, we argue that reduced interobject spacing reflects an efficient cue to guide visual attention toward objects that interact intentionally.

Enhancement and suppression in the visual field under perceptual load

The perceptual load theory of attention proposes that the degree to which visual distractors are processed is a function of the attentional demands of a task-greater demands increase filtering of irrelevant distractors. The spatial configuration of such filtering is unknown. Here, we used steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEPs) in conjunction with time-domain event-related potentials (ERPs) to investigate the distribution of load-induced distractor suppression and task-relevant enhancement in the visual field. Electroencephalogram (EEG) was recorded while subjects performed a foveal go/no-go task that varied in perceptual load. Load-dependent distractor suppression was assessed by presenting a contrast reversing ring at one of three eccentricities (2, 6, or 11°) during performance of the go/no-go task. Rings contrast reversed at 8.3 Hz, allowing load-dependent changes in distractor processing to be tracked in the frequency-domain. ERPs were calculated to the onset of stimuli in the load task to examine load-dependent modulation of task-relevant processing. Results showed that the amplitude of the distractor SSVEP (8.3 Hz) was attenuated under high perceptual load (relative to low load) at the most proximal (2°) eccentricity but not at more eccentric locations (6 or 11°). Task-relevant ERPs revealed a significant increase in N1 amplitude under high load. These results are consistent with a center-surround configuration of load-induced enhancement and suppression in the visual field.

Competition explains limited attention and perceptual resources: implications for perceptual load and dilution theories

Both perceptual load theory and dilution theory purport to explain when and why task-irrelevant information, or so-called distractors are processed. Central to both explanations is the notion of limited resources, although the theories differ in the precise way in which those limitations affect distractor processing. We have recently proposed a neurally plausible explanation of limited resources in which neural competition among stimuli hinders their representation in the brain. This view of limited capacity can also explain distractor processing, whereby the competitive interactions and bias imposed to resolve the competition determine the extent to which a distractor is processed. This idea is compatible with aspects of both perceptual load and dilution models of distractor processing, but also serves to highlight their differences. Here we review the evidence in favor of a biased competition view of limited resources and relate these ideas to both classic perceptual load theory and dilution theory.

Changing target trajectories influences tracking performance

People have the ability to attentively select and successfully track several moving objects, a process known as multiple-object tracking (MOT; Pylyshyn & Storm Spatial Vision 3: 179-197, 1988). Various factors have been known to influence MOT performance, such as speed, number of distractors, and proximity, while recent work has suggested that object trajectories may also be a factor (Fencsik, Kleiger, & Horowitz Perception and Psychophysics 69: 567-577, 2007). Meanwhile, unexpected changes in motion information have been demonstrated to be a critical facet for attracting attention Howard & Holcombe Attention, Perception & Psychophysics 72: 2087-2095, (2010). Therefore, we suggest that unexpected changes in target trajectories are an important factor in tracking performance. The research presented here controlled for spatial proximity while manipulating the number of instances in which an object changed trajectory. We found that spatial proximity had no effect on tracking performance but, rather, as the number of trajectory changes increased, tracking performance suffered. Results imply that the ability to track multiple moving objects is limited by unexpected changes in direction.

Flexible cognitive resources: competitive content maps for attention and memory

The brain has finite processing resources so that, as tasks become harder, performance degrades. Where do the limits on these resources come from? We focus on a variety of capacity-limited buffers related to attention, recognition, and memory that we claim have a two-dimensional 'map' architecture, where individual items compete for cortical real estate. This competitive format leads to capacity limits that are flexible, set by the nature of the content and their locations within an anatomically delimited space. We contrast this format with the standard 'slot' architecture and its fixed capacity. Using visual spatial attention and visual short-term memory as case studies, we suggest that competitive maps are a concrete and plausible architecture that limits cognitive capacity across many domains.

Swapping or dropping? Electrophysiological measures of difficulty during multiple object tracking

In the multiple object tracking task, participants are asked to keep targets separate from identical distractors as all items move randomly. It is well known that simple manipulations such as object speed and number of distractors dramatically alter the number of targets that are successfully tracked, but very little is known about what causes this variation in performance. One possibility is that participants tend to lose track of objects (dropping) more frequently under these conditions. Another is that the tendency to confuse a target with a distractor increases (swapping). These two mechanisms have very different implications for the attentional architecture underlying tracking. However, behavioral data alone cannot differentiate between these possibilities. In the current study, we used an electrophysiological marker of the number of items being actively tracked to assess which type of errors tended to occur during speed and distractor load manipulations. Our neural measures suggest that increased distractor load led to an increased likelihood of confusing targets with distractors while increased speed led to an increased chance of a target item being dropped. Behavioral experiments designed to test this novel prediction support this assertion.

Visually Tracking and Localizing Expanding and Contracting Objects

The maintenance of attention on moving objects is required for cognition to reliably engage with the visual world. Theories of object tracking need to explain on which patterns of visual stimulation one can easily maintain attention and on which patterns one cannot. A previous study has shown that it is easier to track rigid objects than objects that expand and contract along their direction of motion, in a manner that resembles a substance pouring from one location to another (vanMarle and Scholl 2003 Psychological Science14 498–504). Here we investigate six possible explanations for this finding and find evidence supporting two of them. Our results show that, first, objects that expand and contract tend to overlap and crowd each other more, and this increases tracking difficulty. Second, expansion and contraction make it harder to localize objects, even when there is only a single target to attend to, and this may also increase tracking difficulty. Currently, there is no theory of object tracking that can account for the second finding.

A simple proximity heuristic allows tracking of multiple objects through occlusion

Moving objects in the world present a challenge to the visual system, in that they often move in and out of view as they are occluded by other surfaces. Nevertheless, the ability to track multiple objects through periods of occlusion is surprisingly robust. Here, we identify a simple heuristic that underlies this ability: Pre- and postocclusion views of objects are linked together solely by their spatial proximity. Tracking through occlusion was always improved when the postocclusion instances reappeared closer to the preocclusion views. Strikingly, this was true even when objects' previous trajectories predicted different reappearance locations and when objects reappeared "too close," from invisible "slits" in empty space, rather than from more distant occluder contours. Tracking through occlusion appears to rely only on spatial proximity, and not on encoding heading information, likely reappearance locations, or the visible structure of occluders.

Behavioral dynamics and neural grounding of a dynamic field theory of multi-object tracking

The ability to dynamically track moving objects in the environment is crucial for efficient interaction with the local surrounds. Here, we examined this ability in the context of the multi-object tracking (MOT) task. Several theories have been proposed to explain how people track moving objects; however, only one of these previous theories is implemented in a real-time process model, and there has been no direct contact between theories of object tracking and the growing neural literature using ERPs and fMRI. Here, we present a neural process model of object tracking that builds from a Dynamic Field Theory of spatial cognition. Simulations reveal that our dynamic field model captures recent behavioral data examining the impact of speed and tracking duration on MOT performance. Moreover, we show that the same model with the same trajectories and parameters can shed light on recent ERP results probing how people distribute attentional resources to targets vs. distractors. We conclude by comparing this new theory of object tracking to other recent accounts, and discuss how the neural grounding of the theory might be effectively explored in future work.

Hemifield effects in multiple identity tracking

In everyday life, we often need to attentively track moving objects. A previous study has claimed that this tracking occurs independently in the left and right visual hemifields (Alvarez & Cavanagh, 2005, Psychological Science,16, 637-647). Specifically, it was shown that observers were much more accurate at tracking objects that were spread over both visual hemifields as opposed to when all were confined to a single visual hemifield. In that study, observers were not required to remember the identities of the objects. Conversely, in real life, there is seldom any benefit to tracking an object unless you can also recall its identity. It has been predicted that when observers are required to remember the identities of the tracked objects a bilateral advantage should no longer be observed (Oksama & Hyönä, 2008, Cognitive Psychology, 56, 237-283). We tested this prediction and found that a bilateral advantage still occurred, though it was not as strong as when observers were not required to remember the identities of the targets. Even in the later case we found that tracking was not completely independent in the two visual hemifields. We present a combined model of multiple object tracking and multiple identity tracking that can explain our data.

Evidence for a shared mechanism used in multiple-object tracking and subitizing

It has been proposed that the mechanism that supports the ability to keep track of multiple moving objects also supports subitizing--the ability to quickly and accurately enumerate a small set of objects. To test this hypothesis, we investigated the effects on subitizing when human observers were required to perform a multiple object tracking task and an enumeration task simultaneously. In three experiments, participants (Exp. 1, N = 24; Exp. 2, N = 11; Exp. 3, N = 37) enumerated sets of zero to nine squares that were flashed while they tracked zero, two, or four moving discs. The results indicated that the number of items participants could subitize decreased by one for each item they tracked. No such pattern was seen when the enumeration task was paired with an equally difficult, but nonvisual, working memory task. These results suggest that a shared visual mechanism supports multiple object tracking and subitizing.

Impaired multiple object tracking in children with chromosome 22q11.2 deletion syndrome

Background

Chromosome 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome (22q11.2DS) occurs in approximately 1:4,000 live births with a complex and variable presentation that includes medical, socioemotional and psychological symptoms with intellectual impairment. Cognitive impairments in spatiotemporal and visuospatial attention have also been reported. However, maintenance of selective attention to dynamic and interacting objects has not been systematically investigated in children with 22q11.2DS.

Methods

We used a multiple object tracking task to assay capacity and resolution performance of children with 22q11.2DS aged 7 to 14 years versus age-matched typically developing (TD) peers.

Results

Children with 22q11.2DS but not TD children demonstrated impaired performance when task demands increased due to an increase in the number of targets presented, but not from an increase in object speed. Task performance in children with 22q11.2DS was also unrelated to intelligence or measures of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that children with 22q11.2DS may be particularly susceptible to dynamic crowding of objects with increasing cognitive demands related to monitoring multiple targets reflecting a reduced acuity in spatiotemporal cognitive representation.

The Effects of Distractors in Multiple Object Tracking are Modulated by the Similarity of Distractor and Target Features

Is the effect of distractors in multiple object tracking dependent on the distractors sharing the features of the targets? In experiment 1, observers tracked five targets among five distractors that were identical to the targets and a number of additional distractors that were either identical to or featurally distinct from the targets. Results showed that distractors that are distinct from the targets in shape or color, or are stationary, impair tracking less than distractors that are identical to the targets. However, tracking performance declined as the number of distractors increased, even for featurally distinct distractors. Experiment 2 showed that distractors that differ from the targets on two features impair tracking less than distractors that differ from the targets on only one feature, but only when target tracking load is low. These results indicate that shape, color, and motion information about distractors can be used to distinguish them from targets during tracking, although even distractors with a different feature from the targets produce some interference with tracking. These findings suggest that the effect of distractors on tracking is dependent on top–down settings for target features.

Spatial Reference in Multiple Object Tracking

Spatial reference in multiple object tracking is available from configurations of dynamic objects and static reference objects. In three experiments, we studied the use of spatial reference in tracking and in relocating targets after abrupt scene rotations. Observers tracked 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 targets in 3D scenes, in which white balls moved on a square floor plane. The floor plane was either visible thus providing static spatial reference or it was invisible. Without scene rotations, the configuration of dynamic objects provided sufficient spatial reference and static spatial reference was not advantageous. In contrast, with abrupt scene rotations of 20°, static spatial reference supported in relocating targets. A wireframe floor plane lacking local visual detail was as effective as a checkerboard. Individually colored geometric forms as static reference objects provided no additional benefit either, even if targets were centered on these forms at the abrupt scene rotation. Individualizing the dynamic objects themselves by color for a brief interval around the abrupt scene rotation, however, did improve performance. We conclude that attentional tracking of moving targets proceeds within dynamic configurations but detached from static local background.

Selective Attention Warps Spatial Representation

Selective attention not only influences which objects in a display are perceived, but also directly changes the character of how they are perceived—for example, making attended objects appear larger or sharper. In studies of multiple-object tracking and probe detection, we explored the influence of sustained selective attention on where objects are seen to be in relation to each other in dynamic multi-object displays. Surprisingly, we found that sustained attention can warp the representation of space in a way that is object-specific: In immediate recall of the positions of objects that have just disappeared, space between targets is compressed, whereas space between distractors is expanded. These effects suggest that sustained attention can warp spatial representation in unexpected ways.

Exhausting attentional tracking resources with a single fast-moving object

Driving on a busy road, eluding a group of predators, or playing a team sport involves keeping track of multiple moving objects. In typical laboratory tasks, the number of visual targets that humans can track is about four. Three types of theories have been advanced to explain this limit. The fixed-limit theory posits a set number of attentional pointers available to follow objects. Spatial interference theory proposes that when targets are near each other, their attentional spotlights mutually interfere. Resource theory asserts that a limited resource is divided among targets, and performance reflects the amount available per target. Utilising widely separated objects to avoid spatial interference, the present experiments validated the predictions of resource theory. The fastest target speed at which two targets could be tracked was much slower than the fastest speed at which one target could be tracked. This speed limit for tracking two targets was approximately that predicted if at high speeds, only a single target could be tracked. This result cannot be accommodated by the fixed-limit or interference theories. Evidently a fast target, if it moves fast enough, can exhaust attentional resources.

Memory for multiple visual ensembles in infancy

The number of individual items that can be maintained in working memory is limited. One solution to this problem is to store representations of ensembles that contain summary information about large numbers of items (e.g., the approximate number or cumulative area of a group of many items). Here we explored the developmental origins of ensemble representations by asking whether infants represent ensembles and, if so, how many at one time. We habituated 9-month-old infants to arrays containing 2, 3, or 4 spatially intermixed colored subsets of dots, then asked whether they detected a numerical change to one of the subsets or to the superset of all dots. Experiment Series 1 showed that infants detected a numerical change to 1 of the subsets when the array contained 2 subsets but not 3 or 4 subsets. Experiment Series 2 showed that infants detected a change to the superset of all dots no matter how many subsets were presented. Experiment 3 showed that infants represented both the approximate number and the cumulative surface area of these ensembles. Our results suggest that infants, like adults (Halberda, Sires, & Feigenson, 2006), can store quantitative information about 2 subsets plus the superset: a total of 3 ensembles. This converges with the known limit on the number of individual objects infants and adults can store and suggests that, throughout development, an ensemble functions much like an individual object for working memory.

Tracking planets and moons: mechanisms of object tracking revealed with a new paradigm

People can attend to and track multiple moving objects over time. Cognitive theories of this ability emphasize location information and differ on the importance of motion information. Results from several experiments have shown that increasing object speed impairs performance, although speed was confounded with other properties such as proximity of objects to one another. Here, we introduce a new paradigm to study multiple object tracking in which object speed and object proximity were manipulated independently. Like the motion of a planet and moon, each target-distractor pair rotated about both a common local point as well as the center of the screen. Tracking performance was strongly affected by object speed even when proximity was controlled. Additional results suggest that two different mechanisms are used in object tracking--one sensitive to speed and proximity and the other sensitive to the number of distractors. These observations support models of object tracking that include information about object motion and reject models that use location alone.

Position representations lag behind targets in multiple object tracking

In the multiple object tracking (MOT) task, observers can typically keep track of up to four moving objects. Little is known however about the extent to which object motion is used by observers during MOT. For example, direction and speed might be used to anticipate future positions. We here ask to what extent position reports lag behind targets or instead correspond to extrapolated positions. Using a range of different motion trajectory patterns, observers tracked 1-4 targets among distracters and reported the final position of one of the targets. On average, reports corresponded to previous positions rather than the final position. This lag varied across conditions from around 10 to 70ms of the object's trajectory. Although some have suggested that extrapolation occurs during MOT, we find no evidence of anticipation of future positions of targets. The significant increase in lag with speed of the object is consistent with slow or intermittent updating of object positions during tracking.

One to four, and nothing more: nonconscious parallel individuation of objects during action planning

Much of the current understanding about the capacity limits on the number of objects that can be simultaneously processed comes from studies of visual short-term memory, attention, and numerical cognition. Consistent reports suggest that, despite large variability in the perceptual tasks administered (e.g., object tracking, counting), a limit of three to four visual items can be independently processed in parallel. In the research reported here, we asked whether this limit also extends to the domain of action planning. Using a unique rapid visuomotor task and a novel analysis of reach trajectories, we demonstrated an upper limit to the number of targets that can be simultaneously encoded for action, a capacity limit that also turns out to be no more than three to four. Our findings suggest that conscious perceptual processing and nonconscious movement planning are constrained by a common underlying mechanism limited by the number of items that can be simultaneously represented.