Literature DB >> 12613678

Volatile visual representations: failing to detect changes in recently processed information.

Mark W Becker1, Harold Pashler.   

Abstract

Research documenting people's inability to detect large changes in visual scenes suggests that visual representations may be sparse and volatile, providing no cumulative record of the attended items in a scene. However, these studies have failed to control for attention. Thus, the visual system may construct a cumulative record of all attended stimuli and still miss such changes, because they involve items that were never attended to. In two experiments, subjects saw 12-digit arrays and identified either the highest digit in the array (Experiment 1) or the lowest digit not in the array (Experiment 2). Subsequent change-detection tasks revealed that subjects often failed to detect changes that involved the same digits they had previously identified to perform the digit tasks successfully. This provides additional evidence that our usable visual representations are relatively impoverished and volatile.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12613678     DOI: 10.3758/bf03196330

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  18 in total

1.  Postattentive vision.

Authors:  J M Wolfe; N Klempen; K Dahlen
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 3.332

2.  Change-blindness as a result of 'mudsplashes'.

Authors:  J K O'Regan; R A Rensink; J J Clark
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1999-03-04       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Picturing peripheral acuity.

Authors:  S Anstis
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 1.490

4.  Task constraints in visual working memory.

Authors:  M M Hayhoe; D G Bensinger; D H Ballard
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Visual stability across saccades while viewing complex pictures.

Authors:  G W McConkie; C B Currie
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Search asymmetry: a diagnostic for preattentive processing of separable features.

Authors:  A Treisman; J Souther
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1985-09

7.  Tracking multiple independent targets: evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism.

Authors:  Z W Pylyshyn; R W Storm
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1988

8.  Is visual information integrated across successive fixations in reading?

Authors:  G W McConkie; D Zola
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1979-03

9.  Integrating visual information from successive fixations.

Authors:  J Jonides; D E Irwin; S Yantis
Journal:  Science       Date:  1982-01-08       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  Change blindness.

Authors:  D J Simons; D T Levin
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 20.229

View more
  7 in total

1.  On the origin and preservation of cumulative record in its struggle for life as a favored term.

Authors:  Edward K Morris; Nathaniel G Smith
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  The failure to detect tactile change: a tactile analogue of visual change blindness.

Authors:  Alberto Gallace; Hong Z Tan; Charles Spence
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2006-04

3.  Accessing long-term memory representations during visual change detection.

Authors:  Melissa R Beck; Amanda E van Lamsweerde
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-04

4.  The bandwidth of consolidation into visual short-term memory (VSTM) depends on the visual feature.

Authors:  James R Miller; Mark W Becker; Taosheng Liu
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2014-08-01

5.  Shuffling your way out of change blindness.

Authors:  Emilie Josephs; Trafton Drew; Jeremy Wolfe
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-02

6.  To See or Not to See: Do Front of Pack Nutrition Labels Affect Attention to Overall Nutrition Information?

Authors:  Laura Bix; Raghav Prashant Sundar; Nora M Bello; Chad Peltier; Lorraine J Weatherspoon; Mark W Becker
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-21       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Change detection in pictorial and solid scenes: The role of depth of field.

Authors:  Tingting Zhang; Harold Nefs; Ingrid Heynderickx
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-27       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.