Fig 1.
Social priority effect in the visual search array employed from Experiment 1 of Vestner et al. [1].
Detection of the target in the top-left location is faster when the pair are facing (Panel A) than when back-to-back (panel B).
Fig 2.
Examples of Posner cueing (A&B, Experiment 1) and visual search (C&D, Experiment 2, target pair in the top left quadrants) displays featuring stimuli with directional cues.
Fig 3.
Schematic representations of the experiment characters interacting in the priming video of Experiments 2, 3 and 5.
In this example, the round end of the teardrop is the leading edge of the motion direction and perceived as the face. The arrow headed lines were not present in the video and are shown here only to illustrate movement. Note that the characters (shown here as red, purple and yellow teardrop shapes) differed in Experiment 5 (see appropriate section). Part 1: Purple and Red enter the scene, approach the black ball then toss it back and forth. Part 2: Yellow enters the scene, approaches Purple and Red but receives no response. Part 3: Purple and Red toss the ball back and forth then Yellow reproaches each of them. Part 4: Purple and Red move away then Yellow pursues. Part 5: Again, Purple and Red move away then Yellow pursues. Part 6: Purple and Red move away, yellow considers following but then slowly moves away. Full video at osf.io/qxk8z.
Fig 4.
Representations of each experiment with associated stimuli.
Fig 5.
Schematic representation of a trial in Experiment 1.
Fig 6.
Mean (±95% confidence interval) reaction times to target appearance side in each SOA × cue condition for Experiments 1, 4 and 6.
Fig 7.
A-C) Schematic representation of a trial in Experiments 2, 3, 5 and 7. In this example the target pair is that with points together (upper left quadrant). Note that the targets (shown here as red and purple teardrop shapes) differed in Experiment 5 (see appropriate section). Target dimensions were ~30×15 mm and the distance between targets in a pair was ~15 mm.
Fig 8.
Schematic of experiment design demonstrating the progress of a participant in the round “face” social prime condition with inwards-outwards-inwards-outwards visual search blocking.
Fig 9.
Schematic of the target pair presentations for the target orientation question.
Fig 10.
Mean (±95% confidence interval) reaction times to target pairs in the visual search task for each target orientation × social prime condition in Experiments 2, 3, 5 and 7.
Fig 11.
Stimuli and primes in Experiment 3.
A) Seal prime. B) Seal target. C) Schematic representation of the first video prime in which a seal moves right to left. D) Schematic representation of the second video prime in which two seals approaching each other (part 1), greet each other (part 2) and then moving on (part 3). D) Schematic representation of the third video prime in which three seals move into coloured clouds (part 1), the clouds rotate 720° (part 2), and the seals leave the clouds having taken on colour (part 3). All stimuli available at osf.io/qxk8z.
Fig 12.
A) The ambiguous rabbit/seagull. B) Schematic representation of a trial in Experiment 4.
Fig 13.
Examples of semantic priming on the instruction screen for the rabbit (A) and seagull (B) conditions in Experiment 5. Each of the six figures would appear randomly one by one. Schematic of the visual search task in a seagull inwards (C) and seagull outwards (D) display.
Fig 14.
Demonstration of Gestalt grouping.
Fig 15.
Schematic representation of a trial in Experiment 6.
Fig 16.
Stimuli and primes in Experiment 7.
A) Seal prime. B) Seal target. C) Schematic representation of the first video prime in which a seal moves right to left. D) Schematic representation of the second video prime in which two seals approaching each other (part 1), greet each other (part 2) and then moving on (part 3). All stimuli available at osf.io/qxk8z.