Use of human visual attention cues by olive baboons (Papio anubis) in a competitive task.

The ability of 4 olive baboons (Papio anubis) to use human gaze cues during a competitive food task was investigated. Three baboons used head orientation as a cue, and 1 individual also used eye direction alone. As the baboons did not receive prior training with gestural cuts, their performance suggests that the competitive paradigm may be more appropriate for testing nonhuman primates than the standard object-choice paradigm. However, the baboons were insensitive to whether the experimenter could actually perceive the food item, and therefore the use of visual orientation cues may not be indicative of visual perspective-taking abilities. Performance was disrupted by the introduction of a screen and objects to conceal food items and by the absence of movement in cues presented. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The relative use of proximity, shape similarity, and orientation as visual perceptual grouping cues in tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) and humans (Homo sapiens).

Recent experimental results suggest that human and nonhuman primates differ in how they process visual information to assemble component parts into global shapes. To assess whether some of the observed differences in perceptual grouping could be accounted for by the prevalence of different grouping factors in different species, we carried out 2 experiments designed to evaluate the relative use of proximity, similarity of shape, and orientation as grouping cues in humans (Homo sapiens) and capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Both species showed similarly high levels of accuracy using proximity as a cue. Moreover, for both species, grouping by orientation similarity produced a lower level of performance than grouping by proximity. Differences emerged with respect to the use of shape similarity as a cue. In humans, grouping by shape similarity also proved less effective than grouping by proximity but the same was not observed in capuchins. These results suggest that there may be subtle differences between humans and capuchin monkeys in the weighting assigned to different grouping cues that may affect the way in which they combine local features into global shapes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Use of experimenter-given manual and facial cues by gorillas (Gorilla gorilla) in an object-choice task.

Captive lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla) were tested for their ability to use experimenter-given manual and facial cues in an object-choice task. Performance levels were high when the experimenter tapped on or pointed at an object that contained a reward. Performance remained good when the experimenter withheld manual gestures and instead gazed with eyes and head oriented toward the correct object. In contrast, when only the experimenter's eye orientation served as the cue, the gorillas did not appropriately complete the task. Repeated attempts to establish prolonged mutual eye contact with 1 gorilla failed. The gorillas' failure to use eye signals as a cue may be due to an aversion to direct eye contact and contrasts with findings in other great apes. The results may indicate a difference among great ape species in detection of intentionality, but an alternative interpretation is that performance in such tests is influenced by factors such as rearing experience and temperament. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Use of experimenter-given cues in visual co-orienting and in an object-choice task by a New World monkey species, Cotton Top Tamarins ( Saguinus oedipus ).

Two methods assessed the use of experimenter-given directional cues by a New World monkey species, cotton top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus). Experiment 1 used cues to elicit visual co-orienting toward distal objects. Experiment 2 used cues to generate responses in an object-choice task. Although there were strong positive correlations between monkey pairs to co-orient, visual co-orienting with a human experimenter occurred at a low frequency to distal objects. Human hand pointing cues generated more visual co-orienting than did eye gaze to distal objects. Significant accurate choices of baited cups occurred with human point and tap cues and human look cues. Results highlight the importance of head and body orientation to induce shared attention in cotton top tamarins, both in a task that involved food getting and a task that did not. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Eye position effects on the neuronal activity of dorsal premotor cortex in the macaque monkey

Visual inputs to the brain are mapped in a retinocentric reference frame, but the motor system plans movements in a body-centered frame. This basic observation implies that the brain must transform target coordinates from one reference frame to another. Physiological studies revealed that the posterior parietal cortex may contribute a large part of such a transformation, but the question remains as to whether the premotor areas receive visual information, from the parietal cortex, readily coded in body-centered coordinates. To answer this question, we studied dorsal premotor cortex (PMd) neurons in two monkeys while they performed a conditional visuomotor task and maintained fixation at different gaze angles. Visual stimuli were presented on a video monitor, and the monkeys made limb movements on a panel of three touch pads located at the bottom of the monitor. A trial begins when the monkey puts its hand on the central pad. Then, later in the trial, a colored cue instructed a limb movement to the left touch pad if red or to the right one if green. The cues lasted for a variable delay, the instructed delay period, and their offset served as the go signal. The fixation spot was presented at the center of the screen or at one of four peripheral locations. Because the monkey's head was restrained, peripheral fixations caused a deviation of the eyes within the orbit, but for each fixation angle, the instructional cue was presented at nine locations with constant retinocentric coordinates. After the presentation of the instructional cue, 133 PMd cells displayed a phasic discharge (signal-related activity), 157 were tonically active during the instructed delay period (set-related or preparatory activity), and 104 were active after the go signal in relation to movement (movement-related activity). A large proportion of cells showed variations of the discharge rate in relation to limb movement direction, but only modest proportions were sensitive to the cue's location (signal, 43%; set, 34%; movement, 29%). More importantly, the activity of most neurons (signal, 74%; set, 79%; movement, 79%) varied significantly (analysis of variance, P < 0.05) with orbital eye position. A regression analysis showed that the neuronal activity varied linearly with eye position along the horizontal and vertical axes and can be approximated by a two-dimensional regression plane. These data provide evidence that eye position signals modulate the neuronal activity beyond sensory areas, including those involved in visually guided reaching limb movements. Further, they show that neuronal activity related to movement preparation and execution combines at least two directional parameters: arm movement direction and gaze direction in space. It is suggested that a substantial population of PMd cells codes limb movement direction in a head-centered reference frame.     

Gaze following and joint attention in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta).

Gaze and attention direction provide important sources of social information for primates. Behavioral studies show that chimpanzees spontaneously follow human gaze direction. By contrast, non-ape species such as macaques fail to follow gaze cues. The authors investigated the reactions of rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) to attention cues of conspecifics. Two subjects were presented with videotaped images of a stimulus monkey with its attention directed to 1 of 2 identical objects. Analysis of eye movements revealed that both subjects inspected the target (object or position attended by the stimulus monkey) more often than the distractor (nonattended object or position). These results provide evidence that rhesus monkeys follow gaze and use the attention cues of other monkeys to orient their own attention to objects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Bottlenosed Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) Comprehend the Referent of Both Static and Dynamic Human Gazing and Pointing in an Object-Choice Task.

The authors tested 2 bottlenosed dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) for their understanding of human-directed gazing or pointing in a 2-alternative object-choice task. A dolphin watched a human informant either gazing at or pointing toward 1 of 2 laterally placed objects and was required to perform a previously indicated action to that object. Both static and dynamic gaze, as well as static and dynamic direct points and cross-body points, yielded errorless or nearly errorless performance. Gaze with the informant's torso obscured (only the head was shown) produced no performance decrement, but gaze with eyes only resulted in chance performance. The results revealed spontaneous understanding of human gaze accomplished through head orientation, with or without the human informant's eyes obscured, and demonstrated that gaze-directed cues were as effective as point-directed cues in the object-choice task. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Is chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) spatial attention reflexively triggered by gaze cue?

Humans show a reflexive shift in spatial attention triggered by gaze cues. Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) have an excellent ability to follow another's gaze, but they exhibit a limited capacity to engage in triadic interactions based on joint attention, suggesting the possibility of contributions of the different mechanisms underlying joint attention between humans and chimpanzees. The present study thus examined how the chimpanzee's visual spatial attention is triggered by gaze cues. Two chimpanzees showed no clear signs of attention shift triggered by various kinds of nonfacial and facial stimuli with averted gaze under the letter-discrimination tasks but showed significant cueing effects when the head-turning cue was presented in a quasi-dynamic manner. These cueing effects were, however, affected by the predictability of the gaze cue: Highly predictive gaze cues caused stronger cueing effects than less predictive cues. Thus, these results suggest that the shift in spatial attention caused by gaze cues does occur in chimpanzees, but, in contrast to humans, vulnerability against the cue predictability suggests that the voluntary mechanism contributes more dominantly than the reflexive mechanism to this attention shift. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

How attentional systems process conflicting cues. The superiority of social over symbolic orienting revisited.

We investigated orienting of attention by social and symbolic cues presented inside/outside the locus of attention. Participants responded to laterally presented targets preceded by simultaneously presented gaze and arrow cues. Participants’ attention was allocated to either of the cues and the other cue served as a distractor. In Experiments 1–4 nonpredictive cues were employed. The validity of the attended cue and distractor were varied orthogonally. Valid cues and distractors produced additive facilitation to reaction times when compared to invalid cues and distractors. The effects of gaze and arrow distractors were similar. When the cue was 100% valid and the distractor 50% valid (Experiment 5), distractor validity had no effect on reaction times. When realistic gaze and arrow cues were employed (Experiment 6), arrow but not gaze distractors influenced the reaction times. The results suggest that social and symbolic directional information can be integrated for attention orienting. The processing of social and symbolic directional information can be modulated by top-down control, but the efficiency of the control depends on the visual saliency of the cues. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Are Eyes Windows to a Deceiver's Soul? Children's Use of Another's Eye Gaze Cues in a Deceptive Situation.

Three experiments examined 3- to 5-year-olds' use of eye gaze cues to infer truth in a deceptive situation. Children watched a video of an actor who hid a toy in 1 of 3 cups. In Experiments 1 and 2, the actor claimed ignorance about the toy's location but looked toward 1 of the cups, without (Experiment 1) and with (Experiment 2) head movement. In Experiment 3, the actor provided contradictory verbal and eye gaze clues about the location of the toy. Four- and 5-year-olds correctly used the actor's gaze cues to locate the toy, whereas 3-year-olds failed to do so. Results suggest that by 4 years of age, children begin to understand that eye gaze cues displayed by a deceiver can be informative about the true state of affairs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Children's use of triadic eye gaze information for "mind reading."

Five experiments examined children's use of eye gaze information for "mind-reading" purposes, specifically, for inferring another person's desire. When presented with static displays in the first 3 experiments, only by 4 years of age did children use another person's eye direction to infer desires, although younger children could identify the person's focus of attention. Further, 3-year-olds were capable of inferring desire from other nonverbal cues, such as pointing (Experiment 3). When eye gaze was presented dynamically with several other scaffolding cues (Experiment 4), 2- and 3-year-olds successfully used eye gaze for desire inference. Scaffolding cues were removed in Experiment 5, and 2- and 3-year-olds still performed above chance in using eye gaze. Results suggest that 2-year-olds are capable of using eye gaze alone to infer about another's desire. The authors propose that the acquisition of the ability to use attentional cues to infer another's mental state may involve both an association process and a differentiation process. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

You must see the point: Automatic processing of cues to the direction of social attention.

Four experiments explored the processing of pointing gestures comprising hand and combined head and gaze cues to direction. The cross-modal interference effect exerted by pointing hand gestures on the processing of spoken directional words, first noted by S. R. H. Langton, C. O'Malley, and V. Bruce (see record 1996-06577-002), was found to be moderated by the orientation of the gesturer's head-gaze (Experiment 1). Hand and head cues also produced bidirectional interference effects in a within-modalities version of the task (Experiment 2). These findings suggest that both head-gaze and hand cues to direction are processed automatically and in parallel up to a stage in processing where a directional decision is computed. In support of this model, head-gaze cues produced no influence on nondirectional decisions to social emblematic gestures in Experiment 3 but exerted significant interference effects on directional responses to arrows in Experiment 4. It is suggested that the automatic analysis of head, gaze, and pointing gestures occurs because these directional signals are processed as cues to the direction of another individual's social attention. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

How do tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) understand causality involved in tool use?

Four tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) were trained to choose from 2 hook-like tools, 1 of which successfully led to collecting food, whereas the other did not because of inappropriate spatial arrangement of the tool and the food. In Experiment 1, all of the monkeys successfully learned the basic task. The monkeys performed successfully with tools of novel colors and shapes in Experiments 2-5. These results demonstrate that the monkeys used the spatial arrangement of the tool and the food as a cue. However, they failed when there were obstacles (Experiment 6) or traps (Experiment 7) on the path along which she monkeys dragged tools. These results may suggest that capuchin monkeys understand the spatial relationship between 2 items, namely, food and. the tool, but do not understand the spatial relationship among 3 items, namely, food, tool, and the environmental condition. The possible role of stimulus generalization is also considered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Attention to gaze and emotion in schizophrenia.

Objective: Individuals with schizophrenia have difficulty interpreting social and emotional cues such as facial expression, gaze direction, body position, and voice intonation. Nonverbal cues are powerful social signals but are often processed implicitly, outside the focus of attention. The aim of this research was to assess implicit processing of social cues in individuals with schizophrenia. Method: Patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and matched controls performed a primary task of word classification with social cues in the background. Participants were asked to classify target words (LEFT/RIGHT) by pressing a key that corresponded to the word, in the context of facial expressions with eye gaze averted to the left or right. Results: Although facial expression and gaze direction were irrelevant to the task, these facial cues influenced word classification performance. Participants were slower to classify target words (e.g., LEFT) that were incongruent to gaze direction (e.g., eyes averted to the right) compared to target words (e.g., LEFT) that were congruent to gaze direction (e.g., eyes averted to the left), but this only occurred for expressions of fear. This pattern did not differ for patients and controls. Conclusion: The results showed that threat-related signals capture the attention of individuals with schizophrenia. These data suggest that implicit processing of eye gaze and fearful expressions is intact in schizophrenia. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effect of small cue–response separation on pattern discrimination in macaques (Macaca fuscata and M. mulatta).

Three studies with 17 macaque and 6 rhesus monkeys examined the effect of small cue–response separations on Ss' pattern discriminations. When training on a pattern discrimination with a cue–response separation was discontinued during performance at the chance level, there was no saving on the rate of learning a 2nd task (with identical cues but a different cue–response separation) relative to the performance of naive control Ss. By contrast, when training was discontinued at a performance level a little better than chance, there was significant saving on learning a 2nd task. After learning the 2nd task, a 3rd task with new pattern cues was learned, with marked saving on the duration of performance at the chance level. Results indicate that during the initial stage of performance at the chance level, monkeys do not attend to cues if there is even a small separation between the cue and the response site. (25 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

On the uniqueness of attentional capture by uninformative gaze cues: Facilitation interacts with the Simon effect and is rarely followed by IOR.

Orienting to an uninformative peripheral cue is characterized by a brief facilitation followed by a long-lasting inhibition once attention is removed from the cued location. Although central gaze cues cause reflexive orienting, the inhibitory effect that is relatively ubiquitous following exogenous orienting to uninformative peripheral cues has been relatively rare. We hypothesized that IOR might be seen following gaze-induced orienting if attention were effectively returned to centre by a return gaze or return flash. The timecourse of gaze-directed orienting was measured by varying the interval between the gaze cue and a peripheral target requiring an orientation discrimination (permitting measurement of the Simon effect). Significant facilitation was observed at all but the longest SOA tested, 2,880 ms, by which time the facilitation had disappeared with no evidence of IOR. Gaze-induced cuing (which was unaffected by return cue condition) interacted with the Simon effect, decreasing it at the gazed-at location, a pattern that is not seen with more typical endogenous and exogenous cuing. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The influence of blocking on overt attention and associability in human learning.

Previous studies have demonstrated a retardation in the rate of novel learning about previously blocked cues as compared to appropriate control cues. We report an experiment investigating whether this retardation in novel learning about a blocked cue is accompanied by a reduction in attention to this cue, as anticipated by attentional theories of associative learning. Consistent with these theories, eye gaze measures revealed a reduction in overt attention to the blocked cue both during the compound training phase of the blocking procedure, and also during novel learning with respect to new outcomes. Moreover, the extent of the bias in overt attention away from blocked cues was positively correlated with the subsequent reduction in rate of novel learning about these cues. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Auditory localization for spatial orientation

The use of three-dimensional auditory technology that provides localization of auditory cues presented through headphones is proposed as a means of providing supplemental information to pilots on the spatial orientation of an aircraft. This technique shows promise for reducing accidents due to spatial disorientation associated with high visual load. A study was conducted using United States Air Force pilots as subjects to determine desirable? cue characteristics for accurately localizing auditory cues using this technique. The study examined the use of 9 different cue types at each of 2 frequency levels. It was found that the accuracy of subjects' localization of cues in elevation was greatly enhanced by the use of multidimensional cues that provided redundant elevation information through varying frequencies and distance from the horizon cues in addition to the inherent spatial location information. Trade-offs in azimuth localization accuracy and response time were noted, however. Recommendations are made for further developing and investigating this technique for the aircraft spatial orientation task.     

Recognizing facial cues: Individual discrimination by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta).

Faces are one of the most salient classes of stimuli involved in social communication. Three experiments compared face-recognition abilities in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). In the face-matching task, the chimpanzees matched identical photographs of conspecifics' faces on Trial 1, and the rhesus monkeys did the same after 4 generalization trials. In the individual-recognition task, the chimpanzees matched 2 different photographs of the same individual after 2 trials, and the rhesus monkeys generalized in fewer than 6 trials. The feature-masking task showed that the eyes were the most important cue for individual recognition. Thus, chimpanzees and rhesus monkeys are able to use facial cues to discriminate unfamiliar conspecifics. Although the rhesus monkeys required many trials to learn the tasks, this is not evidence that faces are not as important social stimuli for them as for the chimpanzees. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of altering brain cholinergic activity on covert orienting of attention: comparison of monkey and human performance

Experiments were conducted to elucidate the role of the cholinergic neurotransmitter system in arousal and the orienting of attention to peripheral targets. Rhesus monkeys and humans fixated a visual stimulus and responded to the onset of visual targets presented randomly in two visual field locations. The target was preceded by a valid cue (cue and target at the same location), an invalid cue (cue and target to opposite locations), a double cue (cues to both spatial locations, target to one), or, the cue was omitted (no-cue, target to either location). Reaction times (RTs) to the onset of the target were recorded. For monkeys, systemic injections of nicotine (0.003-0.012 mg/kg) or atropine (0.001-0.01 mg/kg), but not saline control injections, reduced mean RTs for all trials, indicating general behavioral stimulation. In addition, nicotine significantly reduced RTs for invalid trials but had little additional effect on those for valid, double, or no-cue trials. Virtually identical effects were observed for human chronic tobacco smokers in performing the same task following cigarette smoking. Injections of atropine in monkeys had no effect on RTs for valid or invalid trials but significantly slowed RTs in double-cue trials that did not require the orienting of attention. These results suggest that in both species, the nicotinic cholinergic system may play a role in automatic sensory orienting. In addition, the muscarinic system may play a role in alerting to visual stimuli in monkeys.