Investigating the role of response in spatial context learning

Abstract

Recent research has shown that simple motor actions, such as pointing or grasping, can modulate the way we perceive and attend to our visual environment. Here we examine the role of action in spatial context learning. Previous studies using keyboard responses have revealed that people are faster locating a target on repeated visual search displays (“contextual cueing”). However, this learning appears to depend on the task and response requirements. In Experiment 1, participants searched for a T-target among L-distractors and responded either by pressing a key or by touching the screen. Comparable contextual cueing was found in both response modes. Moreover, learning transferred between keyboard and touch screen responses. Experiment 2 showed that learning occurred even for repeated displays that required no response, and this learning was as strong as learning for displays that required a response. Learning on no-response trials cannot be accounted for by oculomotor responses, as learning was observed when eye movements were discouraged (Experiment 3). We suggest that spatial context learning is abstracted from motor actions.

Keywords:

• Contextual cueing
• Perception and action
• Visual search
• Touch response
• Eye movement

Acknowledgments

This study was supported in part by NIH 071788. We thank Khena Swallow and Ming Bao for help with eye tracking, Ameante Lacoste, Birgit Fink, and Sarah Rudek for comments, and Eric Bressler, Jacqueline Caston, and Jen Decker for help with data collection.

Notes

¹ Given that RT was faster in the press task than in the touch task, there was a concern that any interaction between response mode and learning was masked by this overall latency difference. To address this concern, we calculated a normalized index of contextual cueing as [RT(new) – RT(old)]/mean [RT(new)  +  RT(old)]. The normalized learning index also failed to reveal an effect of response mode on contextual cueing in either the training phase or the testing phase (Fs < 1).

² We used three possible angles in each orientation to minimize the possibility that observers would use a single memory template for search, such as a 45°-left-tilted T. In debriefing, all participants confirmed that their strategy was to first find the T and only then to determine its orientation.

³ We thank Dominic Dwyer and an anonymous reviewer for raising this possibility.