1983
DOI: 10.3758/bf03205894
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Is visual information integrated across saccades?

Abstract: After subjects established fixation on a target cross, 12 dots were presented parafoveally. When the dots were presented, the subjects made an eye movement to the location of the dots, and during the saccade the 12 initially presented dots were replaced by 12 other dots. The 24 dots were part of a 5 X 5 matrix, and the task of the subject was to report which dot was missing. The data were consistent with other recent studies: subjects could successfully report the location of the missing dot far above chance (… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
101
1

Year Published

1992
1992
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 154 publications
(108 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
6
101
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Instead, unlimited-capacity parallel models have been largely dismissed on the basis of evidence from two related topics of investigation. First, people do not form a composite visual pattern from two component patterns viewed in successive eye fixations (Bridgeman & Mayer, 1983;Irwin, Brown, & Sun, 1988;Rayner & Pollatsek, 1983; though see Brockmole, Wang, & Irwin, 2002). Furthermore, reading is apparently unaffected when the letters of words are alternated between upper and lowercase characters during eye movements (McConkie & Zola, 1979).…”
Section: Implications Of Change Detection Constraint On Capacity Limimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Instead, unlimited-capacity parallel models have been largely dismissed on the basis of evidence from two related topics of investigation. First, people do not form a composite visual pattern from two component patterns viewed in successive eye fixations (Bridgeman & Mayer, 1983;Irwin, Brown, & Sun, 1988;Rayner & Pollatsek, 1983; though see Brockmole, Wang, & Irwin, 2002). Furthermore, reading is apparently unaffected when the letters of words are alternated between upper and lowercase characters during eye movements (McConkie & Zola, 1979).…”
Section: Implications Of Change Detection Constraint On Capacity Limimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, despite the intuitive appeal of this hypothesis, ample empirical evidence has demonstrated that it is probably wrong. Several investigators have found that subjects are unable to fuse pre-and postsaccadic patterns in successive fixations to obtain an integrated composite pattern (e.g., Irwin, 1983;O'Regan and Levy-Schoen, 1983;Rayner and Pollatsek, 1983; for a comprehensive overview see also Irwin, 1993a). Moreover, it has been shown that changing the visual characteristics of words and pictures, such as object size or letter case, has no disruptive effect on word or picture naming (e.g., McConkie and Zola, 1979;Rayner et al, 1980).…”
Section: Transsaccadic Memorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A significant naming time benefit was found when the preview was visually similar and conceptually dissimilar to the target (e.g., when the preview was a carrot and the target was a baseball bat). Similarly, Irwin (1991) showed that subjects could decide with good accuracy (about 70%) whether a dot pattern presented in one fixation matched a second pattern presented in a subsequent fixation (see, also, Henderson, 1997;Irwin, Yantis, & Jonides, 1983;O'Regan & Levy-Schoen, 1983;and Rayner & Pollatsek, 1983, for further supporting evidence against the retention ofhighly detailed point-by-point information in transsaccadic memory using a variety of stimuli).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A significant naming time benefit was found when the preview was visually similar and conceptually dissimilar to the target (e.g., when the preview was a carrot and the target was a baseball bat). Similarly, Irwin (1991) showed that subjects could decide with good accuracy (about 70%) whether a dot pattern presented in one fixation matched a second pattern presented in a subsequent fixation (see, also, Henderson, 1997;Irwin, Yantis, & Jonides, 1983;O'Regan & Levy-Schoen, 1983;and Rayner & Pollatsek, 1983, for further supporting evidence against the retention ofhighly detailed point-by-point information in transsaccadic memory using a variety of stimuli).Although the abstract nature of visual information has been rather firmly established, the level ofrepresentation at which visual information is retained remains uncertain. Irwin (1991) has shown that transsaccadic memory shares a number of properties with visual short-term memory, a memory store that exists within eye fixations (see, e.g., Phillips, 1974), and has suggested that they may in fact be the same memory structure.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%