Attention Dynamics in Spatial-Temporal Contexts

Abstract

This study systematically explored the impact of the spatial metaphor of time on attentional bias using visual order stimuli. Three experiments were conducted. Experiment 1, comprising Experiments 1a and 1b, investigated how the spatial metaphor of time shaped attentional bias across five disorder levels. Experiment 1a examined horizontal orientations, while Experiment 1b focused on vertical orientations. Experiment 2 compared attentional biases toward stimuli with the same disorder level in both orientations. The key distinction between the stimuli was that one represented short-term memory, while the other did not involve memory. Building on the findings of Experiment 2, Experiment 3 compared attentional biases between fully ordered structures (intact Gestalt structures) as non-memory representations and partially disordered structures in short-term memory. The results revealed a significant preference for future-related information, particularly on the right side in horizontal orientations. Short-term memory representations enhanced attentional attraction and triggered inhibition of return (IOR), while fully ordered structures attracted attention as effectively as partially disordered structures, thereby neutralizing attentional biases. Overall, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of the cognitive mechanisms underlying visual attention and the influence of temporal metaphors.

Keywords: Gestalt perceptual organization principles; attention; psychological timeline; short-term memory.

Figure 1

Examples of stimuli used in Experiment 1. From left to right, the images represent five disorder levels: complete order (0D), less than one-quarter disorder (<1/4D), one-quarter disorder (1/4D), two adjacent quarters disorder (1/2AD), and two non-adjacent quarters disorder (1/2ND).

Figure 2

The procedure of Experiments 1a and 1b. In both experiments, participants responded to the position of probe dots. In Experiment 1a, they pressed “F” for dots on the left side of the screen (as shown in the image) and “J” for dots on the right. In Experiment 1b, they pressed “T” for dots at the top of the screen (as shown in the image), and “N” for dots at the bottom. The procedure for Experiment 1a shows a valid cue trial; the procedure for Experiment 1b shows an invalid cue trial.

Figure 3

Interaction effect of image position and disorder level on reaction times (RTs) in Experiment 1a. ** (p < 0.01) reflects significant differences in the discrepancy score of image position. Error bars represent the Standard Error of the Mean (SEM).

Figure 4

The procedure of Experiment 2. In this experiment, participants responded to the position of probe dots. In Experiment 1a, they pressed “F” for dots on the left side of the screen (as shown in the image) and “J” for dots on the right. In Experiment 1b, they pressed “T” for dots at the top of the screen (as shown in the image) and “N” for dots at the bottom. The procedure for the horizontal orientation shows a valid cue trial; the procedure for the vertical orientation shows an invalid cue trial.

Figure 5

Interaction effect of image similarity and image position on reaction times (RTs) in Experiment 2. * (p < 0.05) and ** (p < 0.01) reflect the significant difference in the discrepancy score of image similarity. Error bars represent SEM.

Figure 6

Interaction effect of cue validity and image position on error rates in Experiment 2. ** (p < 0.01) and *** (p < 0.001) reflect the significant difference related to the inhibition of return (IOR). Error bars represent SEM.

Figure 7

Interaction effect of image similarity and image position on error rates in Experiment 3. ** (p < 0.01) reflects the significant difference in the discrepancy score of image similarity. Error bars represent SEM.

Figure 8

Interaction effect of cue validity and image position on error rates. *** (p < 0.001) reflects the significant difference related to the inhibition of return (IOR). Error bars represent SEM.

Figure 9

Three-way interaction effect among image similarity, image position, and group on reaction times (RTs). * (p < 0.05) reflects significant differences in the discrepancy score of image similarity. Error bars represent SEM.