When a reappearance is old news : visual marking survives occlusion.
Kunar, Melina A., Humphreys, Glyn W., Smith, Kelly J. and Watson, Derrick G. . (2003) When a reappearance is old news : visual marking survives occlusion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, Vol.29 (No.1). pp. 185-198. ISSN 0096-1523Full text not available from this repository.
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-15188.8.131.52
Performance in a visual search task becomes more efficient if half of the distractors are presented before the rest of the stimuli. This "preview benefit" may partly be due to inhibition of the old (previewed) items. The preview effect is abolished, however, if the old items offset briefly before reappearing (D. G. Watson & G. W. Humphreys, 1997). The authors examined whether this offset effect still occurred if the old item undergo occlusion. Results show that a preview benefit was found when the old items were occluded but not otherwise, consistent with the idea of top-down attentional inhibition being applied to the old items. The preview benefit is attenuated, however, by movement of the irrelevant stimuli in the displays. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Subjects:||B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology|
|Divisions:||Faculty of Science > Psychology|
|Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):||Visual perception, Gestalt psychology|
|Journal or Publication Title:||Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance|
|Publisher:||American Psychological Association|
|Page Range:||pp. 185-198|
|Funder:||Economic and Social Research Council (Great Britain) (ESRC), Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (Great Britain) (BBSRC), Medical Research Council (Great Britain) (MRC)|
|References:||Assad, J. A., & Maunsell, J. (1995, February 9). Neuronal correlates of inferred motion in primate posterior parietal cortex. Nature, 373, 518– 521. Baillargeon, R. (1986). Representing the existence and the location of hidden objects: Object permanence in six- and eight-month-old infants. Cognition, 23, 21–41. Baillargeon, R., & DeVos, J. (1991). Object permanence in young infants: Further evidence. Child Development, 62, 1227–1246. Baillargeon, R., & Graber, M. (1987). Where’s the rabbit? 5.5 month-old infants’ representation of the height of a hidden object. Cognitive Development, 2, 375–392. Cavanagh, P. (1991). Short-range vs. long-range motion: Not a valid distinction. Spatial Vision, 5, 303–309. Davis, G., & Driver, J. (1997). A functional role for illusory colour spreading in the control of focused visual attention. Perception, 26, 1397–1411. Donk, M., & Theeuwes, J. (2001). Visual marking beside the mark: Prioritizing selection by abrupt onsets. Perception & Psychophysics, 93, 891–900. Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433–458. Enns, J. T., & Rensink, R., A. (1991). Preattentive recovery of three- dimensional orientation from line drawings. Psychological Review, 98, 335–351. Horowitz, T., & Treisman, A. (1994). Attention and apparent motion. Spatial Vision, 8, 193–219. Humphreys, G. W., Watson, D. G., & Jolicoeur, P. (2002). Fractionating visual marking: Dual-task decomposition of the marking state by timing and modality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 640–660. Kellman, P. J., & Spelke, E. R. (1983). Perception of partly occluded objects in infancy. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 483–524. Olivers, C. N., & Humphreys, G. W. (2002). When visual marking meets the attentional blink: More evidence for top-down limited capacity inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 22–42. Olivers, C. N. L., Watson, D. G., & Humphreys, G. W. (1999). Visual marking of locations and feature maps: Evidence from within-dimension defined conjunctions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52A, 679–715. Scholl, B. J., & Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1999). Tracking multiple items through occlusion: Clues to visual objecthood. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 259– 290. Spelke, E. S., Breinlinger, K., Macomber, J., & Jacobson, K. (1992). Origins of knowledge. Psychological Review, 99, 605–632. Treisman, A., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97–136. Verstraten, F. A. J., Cavanagh, P., & Labianca, A. T. (2000). Limits of attentive tracking reveal temporal properties of attention. Vision Research, 40, 3651–3664. Watson, D. G. (2001). Visual marking in moving displays: Feature-based inhibition is not necessary. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 74–84. Watson, D. G., & Humphreys, G. W. (1997). Visual marking: Prioritizing selection for new objects by top-down attentional inhibition of old objects. Psychological Review, 104, 90–122. Watson, D. G., & Humphreys, G. W. (1998). Visual marking of moving objects: A role for top-down feature based inhibition in selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 946–962. Watson, D. G., & Humphreys, G. W. (2000). Visual marking: Evidence for inhibition using a probe-dot detection paradigm. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 471–481. Yantis, S., & Gibson, B. (1994). Object continuity in apparent motion and attention. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 182–204. Yantis, S., & Hillstrom, A. P. (1994). Stimulus-driven attentional capture: Evidence from equiluminant visual objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 95–107.|
Actions (login required)