Literature DB >> 18217818

Spacing affects some but not all visual searches: implications for theories of attention and crowding.

Lavanya Reddy1, Rufin VanRullen.   

Abstract

We investigated the effect of varying interstimulus spacing on an upright among inverted face search and a red-green among green-red bisected disk search. Both tasks are classic examples of serial search; however, spacing affects them very differently: As spacing increased, face discrimination performance improved significantly, whereas performance on the bisected disks remained poor. (No effect of spacing was observed for either a red among green or an L among + search tasks, two classic examples of parallel search.) In a second experiment, we precued the target location so that attention was no longer a limiting factor: Both serial search tasks were now equally affected by spacing, a result we attribute to a more classical form of crowding. The observed spacing effect in visual search suggests that for certain tasks, serial search may result from local neuronal competition between target and distractors, soliciting attentional resources; in other cases, serial search must occur for another reason, for example, because an item-by-item, attention-mediated recognition must take place. We speculate that this distinction may be based on whether or not there exist neuronal populations tuned to the relevant target-distractor distinction, and we discuss the possible relations between this spacing effect in visual search and other forms of crowding.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18217818     DOI: 10.1167/7.2.3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  13 in total

Review 1.  Visual attention: the past 25 years.

Authors:  Marisa Carrasco
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2011-04-28       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  Cube search, revisited.

Authors:  Xuetao Zhang; Jie Huang; Serap Yigit-Elliott; Ruth Rosenholtz
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015-03-16       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Visual search for arbitrary objects in real scenes.

Authors:  Jeremy M Wolfe; George A Alvarez; Ruth Rosenholtz; Yoana I Kuzmova; Ashley M Sherman
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  A summary statistic representation in peripheral vision explains visual search.

Authors:  Ruth Rosenholtz; Jie Huang; Alvin Raj; Benjamin J Balas; Livia Ilie
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2012-04-20       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Detecting and remembering simultaneous pictures in a rapid serial visual presentation.

Authors:  Mary C Potter; Laura F Fox
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 6.  Flexible cognitive resources: competitive content maps for attention and memory.

Authors:  Steven L Franconeri; George A Alvarez; Patrick Cavanagh
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2013-02-18       Impact factor: 20.229

Review 7.  The uncrowded window of object recognition.

Authors:  Denis G Pelli; Katharine A Tillman
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 24.884

8.  Event-related potentials dissociate effects of salience and space in biased competition for visual representation.

Authors:  Matthew R Hilimire; Jeffrey R W Mounts; Nathan A Parks; Paul M Corballis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-09-16       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Competition explains limited attention and perceptual resources: implications for perceptual load and dilution theories.

Authors:  Paige E Scalf; Ana Torralbo; Evelina Tapia; Diane M Beck
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-05-10

10.  Crowding deficits in the visual periphery of schizophrenia patients.

Authors:  Rainer Kraehenmann; Franz X Vollenweider; Erich Seifritz; Michael Kometer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-09-26       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.