Search for a conjunctively defined target can be selectively limited to a color-defined subset of elements.

Kaptein, Nico; Theeuwes, Jan; Heijden, A. H. C. van der

doi:10.1037/0096-1523.21.5.1053

Cited by 180 publications

(241 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

214

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results obtained by Egeth et al (9) had been corroborated by Kaptein et al (10) . These authors manipulated the size of a to be attended subgroup of stimuli (red lines) and the size of a irrelevant subgroup (green lines).…”

supporting

confidence: 78%

“…Other evidences had suggested that the search can be restricted to a subgroup of selected stimuli that have a feature in common with the target, for example, the color, the form, the contrast, the movement or the binocular disparity (8)(9)(10)(11)(12) . In the study of Egeth et al (9) , for example, the subjects had been instructed to search for a red O letter located among red Ns and black Os.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stimuli selection and attentive analysis in the visual search task: evidences of discrete and sequential stages

Galera¹

2003

Arq. Bras. Oftalmol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To find a specific object among many others in the environment is one of the most common actions of our daily life. In accordance with Neisser (1) , the selection of the relevant information in the environment involves two moments: a pre-attentive analysis that performs simple operations on great areas of the visual field, and an attentive analysis that performs complex operations on restricted areas of the field. Treisman and her colleagues (2,3) had applied this idea to the study of the visual information processing. In accordance with her feature integration theory, the selection of an object in the visual field depends on the features of the object and on the features of other objects in the field. The information on the visual features of objects is codified in retinotopic maps, specific to each feature, and independent from each other.The feature maps will codify information through operations carried out simultaneously on great areas of the visual field. Each map codifies only the presence of a specific feature in the visual field, either the color, the size, or the orientation. It informs nothing on the other features, on the position that the feature occupies in the space, or on the identity of the object in which the feature is present. The positions of objects, but not their features or their identities, are codified in a localization map. An object that has only one feature that differentiates it from all other objects present in the field will be selected in a fast and efficient way after an analysis carried out in parallel in the specific feature map. For example, a red vertical line will popout, that is, it will be detected very quickly when it is located among black It is largely accepted that only a few stimuli will be selected and attentively analyzed in a difficult visual search task, but the efficiency of the selection process remains unclear. The present study shows that the processes of selection and analysis are affected by different experimental factors, which contribute additively to the RT. The RT increases as a function of the target-distractor similarity and, as a function of the presence of the background stimuli in the search field. In the target present trials, the presence of the background stimuli increases the RT in 30 ms, independent of target-distractor similarity. In the target absent trials, the effect of the background stimuli is inversely related to target-distractor similarity. The increase in similarity between target and distractor can lead to an increase in the ratio of guessing, compensating or eliminating the increase in RT caused by the presence of the background stimuli. These results are compatible with a model in which the relevant stimuli are selected preattentively and then, submitted to an attentive serial analysis.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 78%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stimuli selection and attentive analysis in the visual search task: evidences of discrete and sequential stages

Galera¹

2003

Arq. Bras. Oftalmol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results of our first three experiments add to the already available evidence that subjects are very well capable of selecting subsets of visual information on the basis of color (for further evidence, see, e.g., Bundesen, Pedersen, & Larsen, 1984;Bundesen, Shibuya, & Larsen, 1985;Clark, 1969;Francolini & Egeth, 1980;Fryklund, 1975;Humphreys, 1981;Kaptein, Theeuwes, & van der Heijden, 1995;Nissen, 1985;Snyder, 1972;von Wright, 1968von Wright, ,1970von Wright, , 1972. Nevertheless, it is worthwhile to note that our evidence for efficient selection on the basis of color was obtained in a particular situation.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 52%

Attending to color with proper fixation

Heijden

Kurvink

Lange

et al. 1996

Perception & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In contemporary theorizing, there is a controversy about the role of spatial location in the selection of visual information; some theories postulate that position plays a unique role, whereas other theories hold that position is just one selection dimension that is not different from other dimensions, such as color and shape. In this context, a paradigm introduced by Tsal and Lavie (1988) promised to be of fundamental importance. With that paradigm, Tsal and Lavie found that, after reporting a first letter of a prespecified color, subjects preferred to switch their reporting to letters from array positions adjacent to that letter over continuing to report letters of the same color as that of the first letter. This switch from color to position provided firm evidence in favor of the "position-special" views as opposed to the "all-attributes-are-equal" views. In the present study, six experiments, employing Tsal and Lavie's paradigm and variations of that paradigm, are reported. Experiments 1, 2, 4, and 5 show that evidence for a switch from selection on the basis of color to selection on the basis of position is not obtained when subjects are forced to fixate the fixation point and possibly also not under normal contrast conditions without fixation controls. Experiment 3 shows that switching from color to position is difficult. Experiments 2, 5, and 6 show that evidence for a switch is obtained only under low-contrast conditions when subjects are not forced to fixate the fixation point. It is concluded that the Tsal and Lavieparadigm is an asymmetric paradigm. The results reported by Tsal and Lavie constituted a major threat for the "all-attributes-are-equal" theories and provided firm support for the "position-special" theories. The results reported in the present study are compatible with the all-attributes-are-equal theories, but, at the same time, do not constitute a major threat for the contemporary position-special theories.In 1988, Tsal and Lavie could still write (p. 15) that the role ofstimulus location in the selective processing of visual information had evolved into an implicit controversy; some researchers believed that spatial location played a unique role in the selection of information, whereas others claimed that it was just one selection dimension that was not different in principle from other stimulus dimensions, such as color or shape. Now, less than 10 years later, this implicit controversy has evolved into an explicit controversy (see, e.g., van der Heijden, 1993, for an overview). A brieflook at current theorizing can make this clear. There are two groups of theories: the "position-not-special" ones and the "position-special" ones. Position Not SpecialIn Broadbent's (1958) filter theory for auditory information processing, no special role was ascribed to position. The filter selected auditory information defined by any given physical attribute. ("Physical features identified as able to act as a basis for this selection included the intensity, pitch, and spatial localization of sounds"; Br...

show abstract

“…The total number of items within a search display (display size) is manipulated and the search efficiency is examined by the change in response time and/or error rate as a function of display size (see Treisman, 1988;Wolfe, 1998 for a review). However, several previous studies have shown that visual search performance is sensitive to the ratio between the two types of distractors, even when the total number of items in a display remains constant (e.g., Bacon & Egeth, 1997;Egeth et al, 1984;Kaptein et al, 1995;Poisson & Wilkinson, 1992;Zohary & Hochstein, 1989).…”

Section: Distractor-ratio Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidance of eye movements during conjunctive visual search: The distractor-ratio effect.

Shen¹,

Reingold²,

Pomplun³

2003

Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The distractor-ratio effect refers to the finding that search performance in a conjunctive visual search task depends on the relative frequency of two types or subsets of distractors when the total number of items in a display is fixed. Previously, Shen, Reingold, and Pomplun (2000) examined participants' patterns of eye movements in a distractor-ratio paradigm and demonstrated that on any given trial saccadic endpoints were biased towards the smaller subset of distractors and participants flexibly switched between different subsets across trials. The current study explored the boundary conditions of this tendency to flexibly search through a smaller subset of distractors by examining the influence of several manipulations known to modulate search efficiency, including stimulus discriminability (Experiment 1), within-dimension versus crossdimension conjunction search and distractor heterogeneity (Experiment 2). The results indicated that the flexibility of visual guidance and saccadic bias exemplified by the distractor-ratio effect is a robust phenomenon that mediates search efficiency by adapting to changes in the relative informativeness of stimulus dimensions and features.

show abstract

Search for a conjunctively defined target can be selectively limited to a color-defined subset of elements.

Cited by 180 publications

References 66 publications

Stimuli selection and attentive analysis in the visual search task: evidences of discrete and sequential stages

Stimuli selection and attentive analysis in the visual search task: evidences of discrete and sequential stages

Attending to color with proper fixation

Guidance of eye movements during conjunctive visual search: The distractor-ratio effect.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About