Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 May 28;12(3):534-48.
doi: 10.1177/147470491401200304.

Dangerous animals capture and maintain attention in humans

Affiliations

Dangerous animals capture and maintain attention in humans

Jessica L Yorzinski et al. Evol Psychol. .

Abstract

Predation is a major source of natural selection on primates and may have shaped attentional processes that allow primates to rapidly detect dangerous animals. Because ancestral humans were subjected to predation, a process that continues at very low frequencies, we examined the visual processes by which men and women detect dangerous animals (snakes and lions). We recorded the eye movements of participants as they detected images of a dangerous animal (target) among arrays of nondangerous animals (distractors) as well as detected images of a nondangerous animal (target) among arrays of dangerous animals (distractors). We found that participants were quicker to locate targets when the targets were dangerous animals compared with nondangerous animals, even when spatial frequency and luminance were controlled. The participants were slower to locate nondangerous targets because they spent more time looking at dangerous distractors, a process known as delayed disengagement, and looked at a larger number of dangerous distractors. These results indicate that dangerous animals capture and maintain attention in humans, suggesting that historical predation has shaped some facets of visual orienting and its underlying neural architecture in modern humans.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Examples of scanpaths from one male participant on matrices from the four treatment blocks of the lion and impala set
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
The latency to (a) first fixate the target animal and (b) manually respond (key press) after detecting the target animal
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Number of dangerous and nondangerous animal distractors fixated
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Duration of time spent looking at animal distractors

References

    1. Bannerman R. L., Milders M., de Gelder B., and Sahraie A. (2009). Orienting to threat: Faster localization of fearful facial expressions and body postures revealed by saccadic eye movements. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 276, 1635–1641. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Belopolsky A. V., Devue C., and Theeuwes J. (2012). Angry faces hold the eyes. Visual Cognition, 19, 27–36.
    1. Blanchette I. (2006). Snakes, spiders, guns, and syringes: How specific are evolutionary constraints on the detection of threatening stimuli? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1484–1504. - PubMed
    1. Brosch T., and Sharma D. (2005). The role of fear-relevant stimuli in visual search: A comparison of phylogenetic and ontogenetic stimuli. Emotion, 5, 360–364. - PubMed
    1. Caro T. (2005). Antipredator defenses in birds and mammals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Publication types