EEG and Eye Tracking Signatures of Target Encoding during Structured Visual Search

EEG and eye tracking variables are potential sources of information about the underlying processes of target detection and storage during visual search. Fixation duration, pupil size and event related potentials (ERPs) locked to the onset of fixation or saccade (saccade-related potentials, SRPs) hav...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Anne-Marie Brouwer, Maarten A. Hogervorst, Bob Oudejans, Anthony J. Ries, Jonathan Touryan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-05-01
Series:Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Subjects:
EEG
SRP
FRP
Online Access:http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00264/full
id doaj-36c3567cec4449249481f4eb1508a921
record_format Article
spelling doaj-36c3567cec4449249481f4eb1508a9212020-11-25T02:03:59ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Human Neuroscience1662-51612017-05-011110.3389/fnhum.2017.00264258705EEG and Eye Tracking Signatures of Target Encoding during Structured Visual SearchAnne-Marie Brouwer0Maarten A. Hogervorst1Bob Oudejans2Anthony J. Ries3Jonathan Touryan4Perceptual and Cognitive Systems, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO)Soesterberg, NetherlandsPerceptual and Cognitive Systems, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO)Soesterberg, NetherlandsPerceptual and Cognitive Systems, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO)Soesterberg, NetherlandsU.S. Army Research LaboratoryAberdeen, MD, United StatesU.S. Army Research LaboratoryAberdeen, MD, United StatesEEG and eye tracking variables are potential sources of information about the underlying processes of target detection and storage during visual search. Fixation duration, pupil size and event related potentials (ERPs) locked to the onset of fixation or saccade (saccade-related potentials, SRPs) have been reported to differ dependent on whether a target or a non-target is currently fixated. Here we focus on the question of whether these variables also differ between targets that are subsequently reported (hits) and targets that are not (misses). Observers were asked to scan 15 locations that were consecutively highlighted for 1 s in pseudo-random order. Highlighted locations displayed either a target or a non-target stimulus with two, three or four targets per trial. After scanning, participants indicated which locations had displayed a target. To induce memory encoding failures, participants concurrently performed an aurally presented math task (high load condition). In a low load condition, participants ignored the math task. As expected, more targets were missed in the high compared with the low load condition. For both conditions, eye tracking features distinguished better between hits and misses than between targets and non-targets (with larger pupil size and shorter fixations for missed compared with correctly encoded targets). In contrast, SRP features distinguished better between targets and non-targets than between hits and misses (with average SRPs showing larger P300 waveforms for targets than for non-targets). Single trial classification results were consistent with these averages. This work suggests complementary contributions of eye and EEG measures in potential applications to support search and detect tasks. SRPs may be useful to monitor what objects are relevant to an observer, and eye variables may indicate whether the observer should be reminded of them later.http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00264/fullEEGpupil sizefixationSRPFRPvisual search
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Anne-Marie Brouwer
Maarten A. Hogervorst
Bob Oudejans
Anthony J. Ries
Jonathan Touryan
spellingShingle Anne-Marie Brouwer
Maarten A. Hogervorst
Bob Oudejans
Anthony J. Ries
Jonathan Touryan
EEG and Eye Tracking Signatures of Target Encoding during Structured Visual Search
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
EEG
pupil size
fixation
SRP
FRP
visual search
author_facet Anne-Marie Brouwer
Maarten A. Hogervorst
Bob Oudejans
Anthony J. Ries
Jonathan Touryan
author_sort Anne-Marie Brouwer
title EEG and Eye Tracking Signatures of Target Encoding during Structured Visual Search
title_short EEG and Eye Tracking Signatures of Target Encoding during Structured Visual Search
title_full EEG and Eye Tracking Signatures of Target Encoding during Structured Visual Search
title_fullStr EEG and Eye Tracking Signatures of Target Encoding during Structured Visual Search
title_full_unstemmed EEG and Eye Tracking Signatures of Target Encoding during Structured Visual Search
title_sort eeg and eye tracking signatures of target encoding during structured visual search
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
issn 1662-5161
publishDate 2017-05-01
description EEG and eye tracking variables are potential sources of information about the underlying processes of target detection and storage during visual search. Fixation duration, pupil size and event related potentials (ERPs) locked to the onset of fixation or saccade (saccade-related potentials, SRPs) have been reported to differ dependent on whether a target or a non-target is currently fixated. Here we focus on the question of whether these variables also differ between targets that are subsequently reported (hits) and targets that are not (misses). Observers were asked to scan 15 locations that were consecutively highlighted for 1 s in pseudo-random order. Highlighted locations displayed either a target or a non-target stimulus with two, three or four targets per trial. After scanning, participants indicated which locations had displayed a target. To induce memory encoding failures, participants concurrently performed an aurally presented math task (high load condition). In a low load condition, participants ignored the math task. As expected, more targets were missed in the high compared with the low load condition. For both conditions, eye tracking features distinguished better between hits and misses than between targets and non-targets (with larger pupil size and shorter fixations for missed compared with correctly encoded targets). In contrast, SRP features distinguished better between targets and non-targets than between hits and misses (with average SRPs showing larger P300 waveforms for targets than for non-targets). Single trial classification results were consistent with these averages. This work suggests complementary contributions of eye and EEG measures in potential applications to support search and detect tasks. SRPs may be useful to monitor what objects are relevant to an observer, and eye variables may indicate whether the observer should be reminded of them later.
topic EEG
pupil size
fixation
SRP
FRP
visual search
url http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00264/full
work_keys_str_mv AT annemariebrouwer eegandeyetrackingsignaturesoftargetencodingduringstructuredvisualsearch
AT maartenahogervorst eegandeyetrackingsignaturesoftargetencodingduringstructuredvisualsearch
AT boboudejans eegandeyetrackingsignaturesoftargetencodingduringstructuredvisualsearch
AT anthonyjries eegandeyetrackingsignaturesoftargetencodingduringstructuredvisualsearch
AT jonathantouryan eegandeyetrackingsignaturesoftargetencodingduringstructuredvisualsearch
_version_ 1724945488689496064