Irrelevant objects of expertise compete with faces during visual search.
Prior work suggests that nonface objects of expertise can interfere with the perception of faces when the two categories are alternately presented, suggesting competition for shared perceptual resources. Here, we ask whether task-irrelevant distractors from a category of expertise compete when faces are presented in a standard visual search task. Participants searched for a target (face or sofa) in an array containing both relevant and irrelevant distractors. The number of distractors from the target category (face or sofa) remained constant, whereas the number of distractors from the irrelevant category (cars) varied. Search slopes, calculated as a function of the number of irrelevant cars, were correlated with car expertise. The effect was not due to car distractors grabbing attention, because they did not compete with sofa targets. Objects of expertise interfere with face perception even when they are task irrelevant, visually distinct, and separated in space from faces.
Department of Psychology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37203, USA. Rankin.williams@vanderbilt.edu
Rankin W
RW
McGugin
Thomas J
TJ
McKeeff
Frank
F
Tong
Isabel
I
Gauthier
D001288:Attention; D001364:Awareness; D004192:Discrimination, Psychological; D005145:Face; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009949:Orientation; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D011214:Practice, Psychological; D011930:Reaction Time; D021641:Recognition, Psychology; D055815:Young Adult
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2005 Jun;5(2):222-34
16180628
Vision Res. 2005 Mar;45(5):643-59
15621181
Psychol Sci. 2001 Jan;12(1):43-7
11294227
Brain. 2003 Nov;126(Pt 11):2381-95
12876150
Perception. 2006;35(8):1089-105
17076068
J Cogn Neurosci. 2005 Apr;17(4):554-68
15829077
Vision Res. 2005 Feb;45(4):431-48
15610748
Vision Res. 1997 Jun;37(12):1673-82
9231232
Psychon Bull Rev. 1994 Jun;1(2):202-38
24203471
Nat Neurosci. 2000 Feb;3(2):191-7
10649576
Cereb Cortex. 2007 Oct;17(10):2354-63
17218483
J Neurosci. 2006 Oct 25;26(43):11187-96
17065458
Cereb Cortex. 2005 Aug;15(8):1234-42
15677350
Psychol Sci. 2009 Sep;20(9):1108-17
19694980
Percept Psychophys. 2006 Jul;68(5):770-5
17076345
Neuroreport. 2004 Apr 9;15(5):777-80
15073513
Spat Vis. 2004;17(4-5):511-41
15559117
Nat Neurosci. 2003 Apr;6(4):428-32
12627167
Psychol Sci. 2002 May;13(3):250-7
12009046
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2010 Apr;36(2):448-61
20364929
J Cogn Neurosci. 2000 May;12(3):495-504
10931774
J Vis. 2006 Mar 13;6(4):379-86
16889476
Percept Psychophys. 2001 Apr;63(3):381-9
11414127
Neuroreport. 2001 Jun 13;12(8):1581-7
11409720
Psychol Rev. 1989 Jul;96(3):433-58
2756067
Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):437-42
9176953
Percept Psychophys. 2005 Aug;67(6):1016-31
16396010
Vision Res. 2006 Nov;46(24):4118-33
17005231
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1989 Aug;15(3):419-33
2527952
Percept Psychophys. 1994 Nov;56(5):495-500
7991347
J Cogn Neurosci. 2007 Mar;19(3):543-55
17335400
Cogn Psychol. 1980 Jan;12(1):97-136
7351125
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Oct 5;101(40):14521-6
15448209
Percept Psychophys. 2001 Apr;63(3):423-35
11414130
Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):433-6
9176952
Nat Neurosci. 1999 Jun;2(6):568-73
10448223
Cereb Cortex. 2009 Nov;19(11):2746-54
19321653
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2009 Oct;71(7):1478-86
19801608
J Vis. 2009 Apr 27;10(4):15.1-12
20465319
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1999 Aug;25(4):1016-35
10464943
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1992 Aug;18(3):849-60
1500880
Percept Psychophys. 2001 Apr;63(3):458-63
11414133
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2006 Jan;59(1):2-27
16556554
J Exp Psychol Gen. 1986 Jun;115(2):107-17
2940312
Percept Psychophys. 2001 Apr;63(3):464-75
11414134