Stimulus size and acuity in information processing

Schultz, Derek W.; Eriksen, Charles W.

doi:10.3758/bf03329719

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The large(modified) rectangle resulted in slower one-object responses than did the small rectangle of the same experiment. This result contrasts with evidence that large objects are usually identified more quickly than small objects (Eriksen & Schultz, 1979;Grice et al, 1983;Navon, 1977;Schultz & Eriksen, 1978). The vertical lines of the large(modified) rectangle are closer together than those of the large rectangle.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 55%

“…Therefore, the prediction was that the large-small and small-large stimuli would slow down the identification of the small rectangle but not that of the large rectangle. This asymmetrical slowdown prediction is consistent with evidence that large objects are usually more quickly identified than are small objects (Eriksen & Schultz, 1979;Grice, Canham, & Boroughs, 1983;Navon, 1977;Schultz & Eriksen, 1978).…”

supporting

confidence: 74%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A large rectangle delays the perception of a separate small rectangle

King

1990

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deciding whether two objects, rather than one, are present takes longer for large-small and small-large pairs of rectangles than for large-large and small-small pairs of rectangles. This large-small slowdown was eliminated when the large rectangle was slightly modified, when the large and small rectangles were contiguous, or when the task was to identify the large rectangle. However, it did occur when the task was to identify the small rectangle. These results suggest that the large rectangle delayed the perception of the small rectangle. Codes for features did not cause this delay. Instead, the evidence indicates that each rectangle evoked its own superordinate code, and that the large-rectangle superordinate code produced the gestalt of a large rectangle and also inhibited the small-rectangle superordinate code, thereby delaying the perception of the gestalt of a small rectangle. Thus, superordinate codes may also bethe direct cause of other gestalts and their associated perceptual outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 55%

supporting

confidence: 74%

A large rectangle delays the perception of a separate small rectangle

King

1990

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It may be argued, however, that the global advantage and the quadratic functions found are the result of size–eccentricity uncertainty conditions. In these terms, because of the uncertainty about the size–eccentricity of the forthcoming stimulus, participants may attend to somewhere in the middle of the attentional field, where they are able to attend to all the locations with minimal effort (Eriksen & Schultz, 1977; LaBerge & Brown, 1986; Schultz & Eriksen, 1978). Such a view would predict that replacement of the size–eccentricity uncertainty condition with a size–eccentricity certainty condition would change the patterns of responses to the global and local levels.…”

Section: Experiments 3amentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of eccentricity and size in the global precedence effect.

Amirkhiabani¹,

Lovegrove²

1996

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SOURCES STATEMENT I certify that the thesis entitled The Role o f Eccentricity and Size in the Global PrecedenceEffect, and submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, is the result of my own research, except where otherwise acknowledged, and that this thesis (or any part of the same) has not been submitted for a higher degree to any other university or institution. Navon (1977) purposed that global configurations are processed more quickly than are local components. Kinchla and Wolfe (1979) demonstrated that this global precedence was lost when the global stimuli exceeded 6-9 degrees of visual angle. Navon and Norman (1983) noted that Kinchla and Wolfe confounded size and eccentricity. They attempted to unconfound these two variables and concluded that global precedence was found with both large and small stimuli when eccentricity was not a confound.It is argued that the controversy in the global precedence hypothesis has partially resulted from the fact that the concepts of the global and local and the attributed relationship between these two vary in different experiments and among workers. In the present study a new approach to global-local relationships was introduced. Global-local relationships were classified into four groups: Inclusion, placeholder, dimensional, and featural relationships. Any of these relationships may or may not be accompanied by a semantic relationship between the global and local levels. The Stroop-type interference of the global and local levels refers to some sort of conventional semantic relationship between the levels. Based on an extensive study of the literature it was suggested that the perception of the global and local levels of a compound pattern is dependent on the type of relationship between two levels. The presented study was limited to test the effect of size and eccentricity of the compound pattern on the processing of the global and local levels with inclusion and placeholder relationships.Debate is still very active regarding the global precedence effect. The present study questioned the initial logic behind this hypothesis about the equal recognisability of the global and local levels, an axiom which has been accepted without being tested. This was investigated in a series of experiments by considering the effects of eccentricity and size and their possible interaction on the processing of the two structural levels, using compound patterns of placeholder and inclusion relationships. Furthermore, the possible iii effect of size/eccentricity uncertainty on the temporal order of processing of the global and local levels and patterns of response times were examined across eccentricity. The results showed a global advantage regardless of attentional strategies or experimental presentation conditions when the eccentricity was controlled. The study of Stroop-type interference between the global and local levels indicated a discontinuity in global/local interference with variations in size and eccentricity. It seems that size and eccentricity are the main determina...

show abstract

“…Size is certainly a relevant factor; within a certain range, large letters will be discriminated more rapidly than smaller ones (Schultz & Eriksen, 1978). The issue is whether it is sufficient to account for global advantage.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Does global precedence reality depend on visual angle?

Navon¹,

Norman²

1983

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

110

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global advantage has been found in some studies to hold only in stimuli subtending no more than 7 degrees - 10 degrees of visual angle. We argue that those studies confounded globality and eccentricity. To avoid this confound we used stimuli with all their elements located along their perimeter (e.g., Cs and circles). These were presented in two visual angle conditions, small (2 degrees) and large (17.25 degrees). In Experiment 1 subjects had to indicate either the direction of an opening of a C made up of circles or of Cs that were the elements of a circle. Contrary to previous findings, global advantage was found for both large and small visual angle conditions. Results from a control condition seem to indicate that the major determinant of that global advantage was relative size. In Experiment 2 subjects responded to the global or local levels of right- or left-facing Cs made up of right- or left-facing Cs. For the small visual angle condition, the global level interfered with processing of the local level, but not vice versa. For the large visual angle, however, interference effects were smaller and symmetrical, even though a sizeable difference in mean reaction time was observed between the responses to the local and global levels. It is suggested that the time it takes to respond to a level when relevant and the level's effectiveness as a distractor when irrelevant are determined at two different stages of processing.

show abstract

Stimulus size and acuity in information processing

Cited by 13 publications

References 10 publications

A large rectangle delays the perception of a separate small rectangle

A large rectangle delays the perception of a separate small rectangle

Role of eccentricity and size in the global precedence effect.

Does global precedence reality depend on visual angle?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About