Psychological mechanisms of multiple object tracking

Context and relevance. The multiple object tracking task is widely used to evaluate professional abilities. In this regard, it is important to understand the underlying processes, as well as the factors contributing to interindividual differences in outcomes. This paper presents a review and synthesis of current research on the psychological mechanisms of multiple object tracking. Current research on the mechanisms. Despite the lack of definitive clarity on how objects are linked to their mental representations, as well as how information about location changes is updated during tracking, significant insights have been obtained in this area. Attention, potentially supported by spatial working memory, plays a crucial role in ensuring multiple object tracking. Additionally, the ability to group objects has been identified, with distinct processes observed in the two hemispheres, which autonomously process information from hemifields. The debate over whether information about objects is updated serially or in parallel persists, with evidence suggesting the involvement of both mechanisms in interaction with each other. Furthermore, a dynamic allocation of attention resources towards areas where objects are most likely to be lost has been observed. Conclusions. The study also identifies the parameters that limit the tracking capacity and discusses the future directions of applied research on interindividual differences in multiple object tracking.

1. Adamian, N., Andersen, S.K. (2022). Attentional Enhancement of Tracked Stimuli in Early Visual Cortex Has Limited Capacity. The Journal of Neuroscience, 42(46), 8709—8715. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0605-22.2022
2. Alvarez, G.A., Cavanagh, P. (2005). Independent resources for attentional tracking in the left and right visual hemifields. Psychological Science, 16(8), 637—643. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01587.x
3. Alvarez, G.A., Franconeri, S.L. (2007). How many objects can you track? Evidence for a resource-limited attentive tracking mechanism. Journal of Vision, 7(13), 14. https://doi.org/10.1167/7.13.14
4. Ayare, S., Srivastava, N. (2024). Multiple Object Tracking Without Pre-attentive Indexing. Open Mind, 8, 278—308. https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_a_00128
5. Balaban, H., Ullman, T. (2024). The capacity limits of tracking in the imagination. PsyArXiv, 14 https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/xzcmb
6. Battelli, L., Cavanagh, P., Intriligator, J., Tramo, M.J., Hénaff, M.A., Michèl, F., Barton, J.J. (2001). Unilateral right parietal damage leads to bilateral deficit for high-level motion. Neuron, 32(6), 985—995. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(01)00536-0
7. Cavanagh, P., Alvarez, G.A. (2005). Tracking multiple targets with multifocal attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(7), 349—354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.05.009
8. Eriksen, C.W., St James, J.D. (1986). Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: a zoom lens model. Perception & Psychophysics, 40(4), 225—240. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03211502
9. Franconeri, S.L., Jonathan, S.V., Scimeca, J.M. (2010). Tracking Multiple Objects Is Limited Only by Object Spacing, Not by Speed, Time, or Capacity. Psychological Science, 21(7), 920—925. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610373935
10. Hadjipanayi, V., Shimi, A., Ludwig, C.J.H., Kent, C. (2022). Unequal allocation of overt and covert attention in Multiple Object Tracking. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 84(5), 1519—1537. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-022-02501-7
11. Holcombe, A. (2023). Attending to Moving Objects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009003414
12. Holcombe, A.O., Chen, W.-Y. (2013). Splitting attention reduces temporal resolution from 7 Hz for tracking one object to <3 Hz when tracking three. Journal of Vision, 13(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.1167/13.1.12
13. Holcombe, A.O., Chen, W.-Y., Howe, P.D.L. (2014). Object tracking: Absence of long-range spatial interference supports resource theories. Journal of Vision, 14(6), 1. https://doi.org/10.1167/14.6.1
14. Howard, C.J., Masom, D., Holcombe, A.O. (2011). Position representations lag behind targets in multiple object tracking. Vision Research, 51(17), 1907—1919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2011.07.001
15. Hyönä, J., Li, J., Oksama, L. (2019). Eye Behavior During Multiple Object Tracking and Multiple Identity Tracking. Vision, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/vision3030037
16. Jarvis, A.L., Hoggan, B.L., Temby, P. (2022). NeuroTracker Multiple Object Tracking Ability Predicts Novice Performance on a Simulated Air Traffic Control Task. The International Journal of Aerospace Psychology, 32(4), 165—182. https://doi.org/10.1080/24721840.2022.2059483
17. Jin, P., Ji, Z., Wang, T., Zhu, X. (2023). Association between sports expertise and visual attention in male and female soccer players. PeerJ, 11, e16286. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.16286
18. Lovett, A., Bridewell, W., Bello, P. (2019). Selection enables enhancement: An integrated model of object tracking. Journal of Vision, 19(14), 23. https://doi.org/10.1167/19.14.23
19. Lovett, A., Bridewell, W., Bello, P. (2021). Selection, engagement, & enhancement: a framework for modeling visual attention. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 43(43), 1893—1899.
20. Lukavský, J., Meyerhoff, H.S. (2024). Gaze coherence reveals distinct tracking strategies in multiple object and multiple identity tracking. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 31(3), 1280—1289. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-023-02417-9
21. Lukavsky, J., Oksama, L., Dechterenko, F. (2022). Tracking objects out of the observer’s view. PsyArXiv, 25 Jan. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/gw7nm
22. Lukavský, J., Oksama, L., Děchtěrenko, F. (2023). Multiple object tracking with extended occlusions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 76(9), 2094—2106. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218221142463
23. McMains, S.A., Somers, D.C. (2004). Multiple spotlights of attentional selection in human visual cortex. Neuron, 42(4), 677—686. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(04)00263-6
24. Merkel, C., Hopf, J.-M., Schoenfeld, M.A. (2024). Location- and Object-Based Representational Mechanisms Account for Bilateral Field Advantage in Multiple-Object Tracking. eNeuro, 11(3), ENEURO.0519-23.2024. https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0519-23.2024
25. Merkel, C., Hopf, J.-M., Schoenfeld, M.A. (2017). Spatio-temporal dynamics of attentional selection stages during multiple object tracking. NeuroImage, 146, 484—491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.10.046
26. Merkel, C., Hopf, J.-M., Schoenfeld, M.A. (2022). Electrophysiological hallmarks of location‐based and object‐based visual multiple objects tracking. European Journal of Neuroscience, 55(5), 1200—1214. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.15605
27. Meyerhoff, H.S., Papenmeier, F., Huff, M. (2017). Studying visual attention using the multiple object tracking paradigm: A tutorial review. Atten Percept Psychophys, 79(5), 1255—1274. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-017-1338-1
28. Nador, J., Reeves, A. (2023). Crowding expands and is less sensitive to target-flanker differences during a shift of visual attention. Vision Research, 212, 108305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2023.108305
29. Posner, M., Nissen, M., Ogden, W. (1978). Attended and unattended processing modes: The role of set for spatial location. In: Pick, I. Saltzma (Ed.), Modes of Perceiving and Processing Information (pp. 137—157). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
30. Pylyshyn, Z.W. (1989). The role of location indexes in spatial perception: a sketch of the FINST spatial-index model. Cognition, 32(1), 65—97. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(89)90014-0
31. Pylyshyn, Z.W. (2001). Visual indexes, preconceptual objects, and situated vision. Cognition, 80(1), 127—158. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00156-6
32. Pylyshyn, Z.W., Storm, R.W. (1988). Tracking multiple independent targets: evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. Spatial Vision, 3(3), 179—197. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856888x00122
33. Störmer, V.S., Alvarez, G.A., Cavanagh, P. (2014). Within-Hemifield Competition in Early Visual Areas Limits the Ability to Track Multiple Objects with Attention. The Journal of Neuroscience, 34(35), 11526. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0980-14.2014
34. Tombu, M., Seiffert, A.E. (2008). Attentional costs in multiple-object tracking. Cognition, 108(1), 1—25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.12.014
35. Tombu, M., Seiffert, A.E. (2011). Tracking planets and moons: mechanisms of object tracking revealed with a new paradigm. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73(3), 738—750. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-010-0060-z
36. Ullman, S. (1984). Visual routines. Cognition, 18(1-3), 97—159. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(84)90023-4
37. Vater, C., Kredel, R., Hossner, E.-J. (2017). Detecting target changes in multiple object tracking with peripheral vision: More pronounced eccentricity effects for changes in form than in motion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43(5), 903—913. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000376
38. Vu, A., Sorel, A., Limballe, A., Bideau, B., Kulpa, R. (2022). Multiple Players Tracking in Virtual Reality: Influence of Soccer Specific Trajectories and Relationship With Gaze Activity. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.901438
39. Wierzbicki, M., Rupaszewski, K., Styrkowiec, P. (2024). Comparing highly trained handball players’ and non-athletes’ performance in a multi-object tracking task. The Journal of General Psychology, 151(2), 173—185. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2023.2241950
40. Yantis, S. (1992). Multielement visual tracking: Attention and perceptual organization. Cognitive Psychology, 24(3), 295—340. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(92)90010-Y