Two effects of context of the presence/absence of connecting segments

King, Donald L.; Thomas, Joneis

doi:10.3758/bf03205197

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 32 publications

(30 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A perceived regular geometric object (and, thus, group) is also associated with assimilation among its parts (e.g., Fuchs, 1923Fuchs, /1967van Tuijl, 1975). A perceived regular geometric object is also associated with closure and subjective contours (e.g., Kanizsa, 1979;King & Thomas, 1993;Ramachandran, 1992), which also imply assimilation. This is because the background can be considered to assimilate to proximal contours to yield the closure and subjective contours.…”

Section: Traditional Assimilationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grouping and Assimilation in Perception, Memory, and Conditioning

King

2001

Review of General Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A group-assimilation theory hypothesizes that a Gestalt-like group is associated with assimilation among the parts of the group. Assimilation is an increase in the perceived or sensed similarity of 1 part to a 2nd part. Assimilation occurs for traditional parts such as color but also occurs for salience. The theory accounts for key outcomes in perception, memory, and conditioning. An important hypothesis is that traditional assimilation and salience assimilation tend to have opposing effects on identification. The traditional assimilation of a target to a 2nd part frequently impairs the target's identification. In contrast, the assimilation of a less salient target to a more salient 2nd part increases the salience of the target and thus improves the target's identification. The corresponding hypothesis that 2 groups are associated with contrast between those parts that belong to different groups is also considered.

show abstract

Section: Traditional Assimilationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grouping and Assimilation in Perception, Memory, and Conditioning

King

2001

Review of General Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, IV-as-assimilation theory is consistent with the 1group-assimilation-IV position, just as DV-as-contrast theory is consistent with the 2groups-contrast-DV position. Whether an IV occurs between objects that are equally visible, and whether IV-asassimilation theory is consistent with previous evidence of an IV (King et aI., 1993;King & Thomas, 1993) will not be considered at this point.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…But when proximity and grouping were unconfounded, the two objects that were less proximal but produced the stronger group were more difficult to discriminate between (King, 1990a;King & Thomas, 1993). Moreover, a high similarity did not substitute for a low proximity, because the two stronggroup objects were less similar to each other than were the two weak-group objects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In addition, the apprehension of a strong group is associated with fast "same" and slow "different" responding (King, 1988b, including review;King, Phillips, & Mose, in press), which is relevant to assimilation, because it should be easy to respond "same" but difficult to respond "different" to briefly perceived perceptually similar attributes. Group-closure evidence also occurs with stimuli that are briefly perceived (King et aI., in press;King & Thomas, 1993).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent evidence suggests that an apprehended group is also associated with an increase in visibility (IV) ofat least one of its parts (King, Hicks, & Brown, 1993;King & Thomas, 1993). To determine whether an IV occurs, a complete object (context-plus-target stimulus) is divided into context and target components.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

One line decreases the visibility of a simultaneous identical distant second line

King

Mose

Nixon

1995

Perception & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A top line decreased the visibility of a simultaneous, identical, distant bottom line. This context-produced decrease in visibility (DV) occurred when the bottom line was masked by flanking lines and hence was less visible than the top line. It continued when the top line was three times as far from the bottom line. It disappeared without the mask. There was a hint of an opposing contextproduced increase in visibility (IV) when the lines were close together. The DVis not accounted for by numerous extant phenomena and theories. It means that the top line decreased the similarity in visibility between it and the bottom line, a contrast effect for visibility, rather than for a typical attribute. Contrast does not occur between two attributes that are perceptually equal. Therefore, the reason why two distant equally visible objects fail to result in a DVmay be that their equal visibility precludes the occurrence of contrast. This Dv-as-contrast theory is consistent with evidence that two groups (phenomenal wholes) are associated with both contrast and DVs, and thus also with evidence that one group is associated with both assimilation and IVs.393

show abstract

A dotted line assimilates in visibility to a solid line

1996

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study tested the theory that a context-produced increase in visibility of a target is due to its assimilation in visibility to the context. A context + target and a context are discriminated better than are a target and background. This occurs for two different context + targets in which the context is a solid line and the target is a dotted line. But it does not occur when solid lines replace these dotted lines. The dotted lines are much less visible than the solid lines. Therefore, the dotted lines increase in similarity in visibility to the solid lines, which is assimilation, but for visibility, rather than for a typical part. Assimilation does not occur between perceptually equal parts. Consequently, the reason why the two context + targets with only solid lines do not result in increases in visibility may be that these lines are sufficiently equal in visibility that assimilation in visibility is precluded. So, the theory is supported. This theory is consistent with evidence that one group (phenomenal whole) is associated with both assimilation and an increase in visibility. Accordingly, a stimulus with a relatively large distance between its solid and dotted lines is apprehended as a relatively weak group, and does not result in an increase in visibility.

show abstract

Two effects of context of the presence/absence of connecting segments

Cited by 6 publications

References 32 publications

Grouping and Assimilation in Perception, Memory, and Conditioning

Grouping and Assimilation in Perception, Memory, and Conditioning

One line decreases the visibility of a simultaneous identical distant second line

A dotted line assimilates in visibility to a solid line

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About