Literature DB >> 6212628

Similarity-related channel interactions in visual processing.

W K Estes.   

Abstract

Lateral interference between letters in the visual field is a joint function of their similarity and physical separation. Data needed to evaluate hypothesis about the processes implicated in these effects were obtained from two experiments in which the task was identification of a target letter always presented in the center of a three-letter display. Variation of target-flanker similarity, the primary variable, was combined factorially with spacing of target and flanker, location of the display in the visual field, delay of patterned postmasks, and exposure duration. The effect of target-flanker similarity on target identification yielded a nonmonotonic function with a minimum at an intermediate degree of similarity. Data from same-different judgments regarding target-flanker similarity indicate that some information about similarity is available even at levels of visibility that do not permit identification of individual letters. All of the findings could be accommodated by a model assuming that only variables determining visibility--exposure duration, mask properties, location in the visual field, separation of letters--influence extraction of featural information pertaining to letter identification. In contrast, visual similarity influences performance by way of sometimes subtle effects on subjects' criteria or response biases and by effects on the encoding and retention of information regarding relative positions of characters in the visual field. The varying effects of similarity reported in the literature on letter identification all appear to be interpretable in these terms.

Mesh:

Year:  1982        PMID: 6212628     DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.8.3.353

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  22 in total

1.  Isolating the interference caused by cue duration in partial report: a quantitative approach.

Authors:  B Giesbrecht; P Dixon
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1999-03

2.  Substitution and pooling in crowding.

Authors:  Jeremy Freeman; Ramakrishna Chakravarthi; Denis G Pelli
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  On the locus of redundancy effects in a letter-detection task.

Authors:  J G Rueckl; S Suzuki; S L Yeh
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1991-05

4.  Expectancy and stimulus frequency: a comparative analysis in rats and humans.

Authors:  K Pang; F Merkel; H Egeth; D S Olton
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1992-06

5.  Consequences of allocating attention to locations and to other attributes.

Authors:  H W Kwak; H Egeth
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1992-05

6.  How important is lateral masking in visual search?

Authors:  A H Wertheim; I T C Hooge; K Krikke; A Johnson
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-11-23       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Semantic processing of crowded stimuli?

Authors:  Anke Huckauf; Andre Knops; Hans-Christoph Nuerk; Klaus Willmes
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2008-10-08

8.  Priming is not necessary for selective-attention failures: semantic effects of unattended, unprimed letters.

Authors:  J Miller
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1987-05

9.  Discriminability and bias in the word-superiority effect.

Authors:  W K Estes; J L Brunn
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1987-11

10.  A summary-statistic representation in peripheral vision explains visual crowding.

Authors:  Benjamin Balas; Lisa Nakano; Ruth Rosenholtz
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2009-11-19       Impact factor: 2.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.