Binocular information acquisition and visual memory.

Abstract

Mechanisms underlying the binocular combination of visual information were investigated within the context of a visual information acquisition theory proposed by Loftus, Busey, and their colleagues (e.g., as described by T.A. Busey & G. R. Loftus, 1994). A central assumption of the theory is that of a sensory threshold, which engenders an information loss such that information processing subsequent to the threshold is assumed to occur only when the magnitude of a sensory representation triggered by the stimulus exceeds the threshold. The presumed sensory threshold may be situated prior to or subsequent to the point at which the information from the two eyes combines. The location of this threshold was investigated in 3 experiments that provided conclusions about the location of the sensory thresholds and the mechanisms of binocular combination. It is concluded that a linear summation mechanism, an independent sampling information acquisition model, and both pre- and postcombinatorial sources of information loss are required to account for the data.

On the Relations among Different Measures of Visible and Informational Persistence

“…As noted earlier, our second goal in this article is to account for our data with a theory that has been presented elsewhere by Loftus and his colleagues (e.g., Loftus, Busey, & Senders, 1993;Loftus & Ruthruff, 1994;Busey & Loftus, 1994;1998). Application of this theory to visible persistence has its roots in models described by Loftus and Hogden (1988), Loftus and Hanna (1989), Loftus and Busey (1992), and Dixon and Di Lollo (1994).…”

“…In this section, we describe a theory that has been applied to a variety of perceptual and cognitive phenomena, including iconic information acquisition in both picture recognition tasks (Loftus & Hogden, 1988), and digit recall tasks (Loftus, Duncan & Gehrig, 1992), synchrony-judgment performance (Loftus & Hogden, 1988), duration-intensity tradeoffs (Loftus & Ruthruff, 1994), and perceptual integration of temporally distributed information (Busey & Loftus, 1994;Loftus, Busey, & Senders, 1993) and binocular information acquisition (Busey & Loftus, 1998). The theory has also been applied to the present subjective-completeness task (Loftus & Hanna, 1989), and has qualitatively, but not quantitatively, accounted for both inverseduration and ISI effects in partial report (Loftus & Busey, 1992).…”

“…Less expected is that binocular performance is worse than monocular performance. To fit our theory, we assumed simple ocular additivity: that the binocular a(t) function is the monocular a(t) function multiplied by 2 (see Busey & Loftus, 1998, for a justification of this assumption). As indicated in the right panels of Fig.…”

How Different Spatial-Frequency Components Contribute to Visual Information Acquisition.

“…To do so, they fit to their data a theory called the sensory response-information acquisition (SRIA) theory, which is an instance of what we have defined to be an independence theory: The order of spatial-frequency components does not matter, and the spatial-frequency components combine additively. The SRIA theory has been described in detail elsewhere as it applies to perception and memory of digit strings (Busey & Loftus, 1994, 1998; Loftus, Busey, & Senders, 1993; Loftus & Ruthruff, 1994); line drawings (Loftus & McLean, 1999); and random forms (Harley, Dillon, & Loftus, 2003). To understand the meaning of Olds and Engel's results, it is necessary to understand this theory, so we describe it here briefly.…”

Integrating neuronal coding into cognitive models: Predicting reaction time distributions

“…Once the evidence or information exceeds a threshold, a decision about the presence or absence of the stimulus can be made (Loftus et al 1983;Busey & Loftus 1994;Loftus & Ruthruff 1994b;Chun & Wolfe 1996;Palmer & McLean 1996;Busey & Loftus 1998;Verghese 2001). …”