Identifying a target is more difficult when distracters are present within a zone of interaction around the target. We investigated whether the spatial extent of the zone of interaction scales with the size of the target. Our target was a letter T in one-of-four orientations. Our distracters were four squared-thetas in one-of-two orientations, presented one in each of the four cardinal directions, equidistant from the target. Target-distracter separation was varied and the proportion of correct responses at each separation was determined. From these the extent of interaction was estimated. This procedure was repeated for different target sizes spread over a 5-fold range. In each case, the contrast of the target was adjusted so that its visibility was constant across target sizes. The experiment was performed in the luminance domain (grey targets on grey background) and in the chromatic domain (green target on equiluminant grey background). In the luminance domain, target size had only a small effect on the extent of interaction; these interactions did not scale with target size. The extents of interaction for chromatic stimuli were similar to those for luminance stimuli. For a fixed target visibility, decreasing the duration of the stimulus resulted in an increase in the extent of interaction. The relevance of our findings is discussed with regard to a variety of proposed explanations for crowding. Our results are consistent with an attention-based explanation for crowding.

Spatial interactions are extensive in the peripheral visual field, extending up to about half the retinal eccentricity of the target (Toet and Levi, Vision Res. 32, 1349-1357, 1992). In the present study it is shown that the degree and extent of peripheral spatial interaction depends in large measure on the similarity between test and flanking stimuli. The stimulus consisted of a test T surrounded by four distracting flanking Ts, each randomly oriented. The task was to determine the orientation of the test T. The test and flanking Ts differed in contrast polarity, shape, depth, color, eye of origin, or contrast. When the target and flanks differed in contrast polarity, depth, or shape, performance improved markedly for all observers. A color difference enhanced the performance of most but not all observers. Eye-of-origin had no effect, that is, spatial interaction was identical when the target and flanks were presented to the same eye, or to opposite eyes. The role of stimulus duration in spatial interaction was examined in two additional experiments. In the first, the stimulus viewing duration was increased in order to allow the observer time to serially search for the test T. In the second experiment, a postmask was presented at the location of the test T. The results of these experiments showed that the influence of similarity was independent of stimulus duration and the postmask, and suggest that serial search does not play an important role in the spatial interaction effects reported here. The extent of spatial interaction is correlated with the ability to do parallel search.

In the random dot kinematograms used to analyze the detection of coherent motion in the middle temporal visual area (MT) and in psychophysical experiments the exact way that dots are paired between successive presentations is not known by the observer. We show how to calculate the limit to coherence threshold caused by this uncertainty, which we call "correspondence noise." We compare ideal thresholds limited only by this noise with those of human observers when dot density, ratio of dot numbers in two fields, area of stimulus, number of fields, and method of generation of the coherent dots are varied. The observed thresholds vary in the same way as the ideal thresholds over wide ranges, but they are much higher. We think this difference is because the ideal detector takes advantage of the high precision with which dots are placed in the kinematograms, whereas the neural motion system can only operate with low precision. When kinematograms are generated with decreased precision of dot placement, the ideal detector no longer has this advantage, and the gap between ideal and actual performance is greatly reduced. Because the signals that result from objects moving in the real world are scattered over broad ranges of direction and velocity, high precision is not needed, and it is advantageous for the motion system to pool information over broad ranges. Other mismatches between kinematograms and the neural motion system, and internal noise, may also elevate human thresholds relative to the ideal detector. The importance of external noise suggests that the neurons of MT form a vast array of optimal filters, each matched to a different combination of parameters in the multidimensional space required to define motion in patches of the visual field. Key words: correspondence noise; coherent motion; statistical efficiency; integration; matched filters; MT or V5; global motionThe motivation for the work to be described here was to find the natural difficulties and limiting factors for detecting motion in the random dot kinematograms that have been used so successfully to analyze the neuronal basis for the detection of coherent motion by monkeys (Newsome et al., 1989(Newsome et al., , 1990Britten et al., 1992Britten et al., , 1995Celebrini and Newsome, 1994). In this paradigm some of the dots are moved coherently in the same direction from field to field, whereas the remainder are replaced at random positions; the behavioral responses of the monkey, and the discharges of its cortical neurons, are tested for their ability to detect motions with varying percentages of coherence, and a fraction as low as 5% is often reliably detected both by the whole monkey and by single neurons in the middle temporal visual area (MT or V5). We thought that the value of the comparison between neurophysiology and behavior would be much increased if the limiting factors were better understood. Figure 1, top, illustrates the correspondence problem, which arises whenever motion has to be detected and is specially important in random dot kinemato...

Where do the bottlenecks for information and attention lie when our visual system processes incoming stimuli? The human visual system encodes the incoming stimulus and transfers its contents into three major memory systems with increasing time scales, viz., sensory (or iconic) memory, visual short-term memory (VSTM), and long-term memory (LTM). It is commonly believed that the major bottleneck of information processing resides in VSTM. In contrast to this view, we show major bottlenecks for motion processing prior to VSTM. In the first experiment, we examined bottlenecks at the stimulus encoding stage through a partial-report technique by delivering the cue immediately at the end of the stimulus presentation. In the second experiment, we varied the cue delay to investigate sensory memory and VSTM. Performance decayed exponentially as a function of cue delay and we used the time-constant of the exponential-decay to demarcate sensory memory from VSTM. We then decomposed performance in terms of quality and quantity measures to analyze bottlenecks along these dimensions. In terms of the quality of information, two thirds to three quarters of the motion-processing bottleneck occurs in stimulus encoding rather than memory stages. In terms of the quantity of information, the motion-processing bottleneck is distributed, with the stimulus-encoding stage accounting for one third of the bottleneck. The bottleneck for the stimulus-encoding stage is dominated by the selection compared to the filtering function of attention. We also found that the filtering function of attention is operating mainly at the sensory memory stage in a specific manner, i.e., influencing only quantity and sparing quality. These results provide a novel and more complete understanding of information processing and storage bottlenecks for motion processing.

The multiple-object tracking paradigm (MOT) has been used extensively for studying dynamic visual attention, but the basic mechanisms which subserve this capability are as yet unknown. Among the unresolved issues surrounding MOT are the relative importance of motion (as opposed to positional) information and the role of various memory mechanisms. We sought to quantify the capacity and dynamics for retention of direction-of-motion information when viewing a multiple-object motion stimulus similar to those used in MOT. Observers viewed three to nine objects in random linear motion and then reported motion direction after motion ended. Using a partial-report paradigm and varying the parameters of set size and time of retention, we found evidence for two complementary memory systems, one transient with high capacity and a second sustained system with low capacity. For the transient high-capacity memory, retention capacity was equally high whether object motion lasted several seconds or a fraction of a second. Also, a graded deterioration in performance with increased set size lends support to a flexible-capacity theory of MOT.

No abstract

Human observers can simultaneously track up to five targets in motion (Z. W. Pylyshyn & R. W. Storm, 1988). We examined the precision for detecting deviations in linear trajectories by measuring deviation thresholds as a function of the number of trajectories (T ). When all trajectories in the stimulus undergo the same deviation, thresholds are uninfluenced by T for T

We estimated the effective number of trajectories that amblyopic observers could track with their amblyopic eyes and their non-amblyopic eyes using stimuli and methods described in S. P. Tripathy, S. Narasimhan, and B. T. Barrett (2007). The stimuli consisted of dots moving along straight-line trajectories. In Experiment 1, one of the T trajectories (the target) deviated clockwise or counterclockwise by +/-19 degrees , +/-38 degrees , or +/-76 degrees , halfway through the trajectory. In Experiment 2, D of the T trajectories deviated, all in the same direction and with the same magnitude of direction change. In both experiments, we varied T and the angle of deviation. In Experiment 2, we also varied D. Amblyopic observers reported the direction of deviation of the target trajectories and, for each eye, the effective number of tracked trajectories was estimated. This number increased systematically with increasing magnitude of deviation of the targets. On average, the effective numbers of tracked trajectories were approximately 15% smaller for the amblyopic eyes for each of the three magnitudes of deviation. A comparison with data previously published for normal eyes failed to reveal any deficit in the effective number of trajectories tracked by the non-amblyopic eyes of amblyopic observers for the current task.