Literature DB >> 18927017

Looking at scenes while searching for numbers: dividing attention multiplies space.

Helene Intraub1, Karen K Daniels, Todd S Horowitz, Jeremy M Wolfe.   

Abstract

Observers tend to remember seeing a greater expanse of a scene than was shown (boundary extension [BE]). Is undivided visual attention necessary for BE? In Experiment 1, 108 observers viewed photographs with superimposed numerals (2s and 5s). Each appeared for 750 msec, followed by a masked interval and a test picture (same, closer up, or wider angled). Test pictures were rated as the same, closer, or wider angled on a 5-point scale. Visual attention was manipulated with a search task: The observers reported the number of 5s (zero, one, or two). The observers performed search only, picture rating only, or both (giving search priority). Search accuracy was unaffected by condition. BE occurred in both conditions but was greater with divided attention. The results were replicated using incidental BE tests (Experiments 2 and 3). We propose that anticipatory representation of layout occurs automatically during scene perception, with focal attention serving to constrain the boundary error.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18927017      PMCID: PMC4551389          DOI: 10.3758/PP.70.7.1337

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 0031-5117


  27 in total

1.  Boundary extension: the role of magnification, object size, context, and binocular information.

Authors:  Marco Bertamini; Luke A Jones; Alice Spooner; Heiko Hecht
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 3.332

2.  More than meets the eye: the effect of planned fixations on scene representation.

Authors:  Helene Intraub; James E Hoffman; C Jeffrey Wetherhold; Stacy-Ann Stoehs
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2006-07

3.  Transsaccadic representation of layout: what is the time course of boundary extension?

Authors:  Christopher A Dickinson; Helene Intraub
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  A common mechanism for illusory and occluded object completion.

Authors:  P J Kellman; C Yin; T F Shipley
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Effects of perceiving and imagining scenes on memory for pictures.

Authors:  H Intraub; C V Gottesman; A J Bills
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

7.  Conceptual masking: the effects of subsequent visual events on memory for pictures.

Authors:  H Intraub
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 8.  Change blindness: past, present, and future.

Authors:  Daniel J Simons; Ronald A Rensink
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 20.229

9.  Misremembering pictured objects: people of all ages demonstrate the boundary extension illusion.

Authors:  John G Seamon; Sarah E Schlegel; Peter M Hiester; Susan M Landau; Brianne F Blumenthal
Journal:  Am J Psychol       Date:  2002

10.  Perceiving "outside the box" occurs early in development: evidence for boundary extension in three- to seven-month-old infants.

Authors:  Paul C Quinn; Helene Intraub
Journal:  Child Dev       Date:  2007 Jan-Feb
View more
  15 in total

1.  Visual, haptic and bimodal scene perception: evidence for a unitary representation.

Authors:  Helene Intraub; Frank Morelli; Kristin M Gagnier
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2015-02-25

2.  Is visual attention required for robust picture memory?

Authors:  Jeremy M Wolfe; Todd S Horowitz; Kristin O Michod
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2007-02-16       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Spatial asymmetries in viewing and remembering scenes: consequences of an attentional bias?

Authors:  Christopher A Dickinson; Helene Intraub
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  The role of arousal in boundary judgement errors.

Authors:  Deanne M Green; Jessica A Wilcock; Melanie K T Takarangi
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2019-07

5.  Increasing task demand by obstructing object recognition increases boundary extension.

Authors:  Ralph G Hale; James M Brown; Benjamin A McDunn
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-10

6.  Auditory memory distortion for spoken prose.

Authors:  Joanna L Hutchison; Timothy L Hubbard; Blaise Ferrandino; Ryan Brigante; Jamie M Wright; Bart Rypma
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2012-05-21       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  Fixating picture boundaries does not eliminate boundary extension: implications for scene representation.

Authors:  Kristin Michod Gagnier; Christopher A Dickinson; Helene Intraub
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2013-04-03       Impact factor: 2.143

8.  When less is more: Line-drawings lead to greater boundary extension than color photographs.

Authors:  Kristin Michod Gagnier; Helene Intraub
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2012-07-27

9.  The neural correlates of visuospatial perceptual and oculomotor extrapolation.

Authors:  Marc Tibber; Ayse Pinar Saygin; Simon Grant; Dean Melmoth; Geraint Rees; Michael Morgan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-03-15       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  No imagination effect on boundary extension.

Authors:  Margaret P Munger; Kristi S Multhaup
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.