Search

The presence of a weapon in a scene has been found to attract observers’ attention and to impair their memory of the person holding the weapon. Here, we examined the role of attention in this weapon focus effect (WFE) under different viewing conditions. German participants viewed stimuli in which a man committed a robbery while holding a gun or a cell phone. The stimuli were based on material used in a recent U.S. study reporting large memory effects. Recording eye movements allowed us to test whether observers’ attention in the gun condition shifted away from the perpetrator towards the gun, compared with the phone condition. When using videos (Experiment 1), weapon presence did not appear to modulate the viewing time for the perpetrator, whereas the evidence concerning the critical object remained inconclusive. When using slide shows (Experiment 2), the gun attracted more gaze than the phone, replicating previous research. However, the attentional shift towards the weapon did not come at a cost of viewing time on the perpetrator. In both experiments, observers focused their attention predominantly on the depicted people and much less on the gun or phone. The presence of a weapon did not cause participants to recall fewer details about the perpetrator’s appearance in either experiment. This null effect was replicated in an online study using the original videos and testing more participants. The results seem at odds with the attention-shift explanation of the WFE. Moreover, the results indicate that the WFE is not a universal phenomenon.

Research on eye-movement control during natural scene viewing has investigated the degree to which the duration of individual fixations can be immediately adjusted to ongoing visual-cognitive processing demands. Results from several studies using the fixation-contingent scene quality paradigm suggest that the timing of fixations adapts to stimulus changes that occur on a fixation-to-fixation basis. Analysis of fixation-duration distributions has revealed that saccade-contingent degradations and enhancements of the scene stimulus have two qualitatively distinct types of influence. The surprise effect begins early in a fixation and is tied to surprising visual events such as unexpected stimulus changes. The encoding effect is tied to difficulties in visual-cognitive processing and occurs relatively late within a fixation. Here, we formalize an existing descriptive account of these two effects (referred to as the dual-process account) by using stochastic simulations. In the computational model, surprise and encoding related influences are implemented as time-dependent changes in the rate at which saccade timing and programming are completed during critical fixations. The model was tested on data from two experiments in which the luminance of the scene image was either decreased or increased during selected critical fixations (Walshe & Nuthmann, Vision Research, 100, 38–46, 2014). A counterfactual method was used to remove model components and to identify their specific influence on the fixation-duration distributions. The results suggest that the computational dual-process model provides a good account for the data from the luminance-change studies. We describe how the simulations can be generalized to explain a diverse set of experimental results.

Previous research on eye guidance in reading has investigated systematic tendencies with respect to horizontal fixation locations on letters within words and the relationship between fixation location in a word and the duration of the fixation. The present study investigates where readers place their eyes vertically on the line of text and how vertical fixation location is related to fixation duration. Analyses were based on a large corpus of eye movement recordings from single-sentence reading. The vertical preferred viewing location was found to be within the vertical extent of the font, but fixations beyond the vertical boundaries of the text also frequently occurred. Analyzing fixation duration as a function of vertical fixation location revealed a vertical optimal viewing position (vOVP) effect: Fixations were shortest when placed optimally on the line of text, and fixation duration gradually increased for fixations that fell above or below the line of text. The vOVP effect can be explained by the limits of visual resolution along the vertical meridian. It is concluded that vertical and horizontal landing positions in single-sentence reading are associated with differences in fixation durations in opposite ways.