What Kind of Memory Supports Visual Marking?

Jiang, Yuhong; Wang, Stephanie W.

doi:10.1037/0096-1523.30.1.79

Cited by 25 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the Gap condition, the maintenance of inhibition in the face of irrelevant capture supports the assertion that that VWM can bias selection towards previously unattended locations during search (Al-Aidroos et al, 2012;Emrich et al, 2008;McCarley et al, 2003). In addition, our data indicate the contribution of memory-based inhibition to the preview benefit is sensitive to both the number and salience of objects that elicit capture during search (Jiang & Wang, 2004;Watson & Humphreys, 1997;Yantis & Johnson, 1990;Yantis & Jones, 1991). This dependency suggests efficient search relies on the effective integration of separate forms of guidance rather than a single unitary resource.…”

Section: Jiang and Wang (2004) Interpreted A Similar Dependency As Evsupporting

confidence: 79%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Visuospatial working memory mediates inhibitory and facilitatory guidance in preview search.

Barrett¹,

Shimozaki²,

Jensen³

et al. 2016

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual search is faster and more accurate when a subset of distractors is presented before the display containing the target. This "preview benefit" has been attributed to separate inhibitory and facilitatory guidance mechanisms during search. In the preview task the temporal cues thought to elicit inhibition and facilitation provide complementary sources of information about the likely location of the target. In this study, we use a Bayesian Observer model to compare sensitivity when the temporal cues eliciting inhibition and facilitation produce complementary, and competing, sources of information. Observers searched for T-shaped targets among L-shaped distractors in two standard and two preview conditions. In the standard conditions, all the objects in the display appeared at the same time. In the preview conditions, the initial subset of distractors either stayed on the screen or disappeared before the onset of the search display, which contained the target when present. In the latter, the synchronous onset of old and new objects negates the predictive utility of stimulus-driven capture during search. The results indicate observers combine memory-driven inhibition and sensory-driven capture to reduce spatial uncertainty about the target's likely location during search. In the absence of spatially predictive onsets, memorydriven inhibition at old locations persists despite irrelevant sensory change at previewed locations. This result is consistent with a bias towards unattended objects during search via the active suppression of irrelevant capture at previously attended locations.

show abstract

Section: Jiang and Wang (2004) Interpreted A Similar Dependency As Evsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…Extending the current design to include larger set sizes, however, may distinguish the robust inhibition observed in this study from the more fragile inhibition thought to operate in larger displays (Al-Aidroos et al, 2012;Jiang & Wang, 2004).…”

Section: Jiang and Wang (2004) Interpreted A Similar Dependency As Evmentioning

confidence: 97%

Visuospatial working memory mediates inhibitory and facilitatory guidance in preview search.

Barrett¹,

Shimozaki²,

Jensen³

et al. 2016

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Interestingly, this capacity limit corresponds to the capacity of visual short-term memory (Cowan, 2001;Luck & Vogel, 1997). In fact, previous studies have found that the preview benefit is greatest when the number of previewed items is within this capacity (Jiang, Chun, & Marks, 2002), providing evidence that this effect may depend in part on this sort of memory store (but see Jiang & Wang, 2004). Regardless of whether this effect is dependent on memory processes, the findings that the preview effect is affected by the number of previewed items and by ased away from old items confirms the findings of Watson and Inglis (2007), we have demonstrated that this effect does not persist throughout the entire search process.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Out with the old: Inhibition of old items in a preview search is limited

Emrich

Ruppel

Al-Aidroos

et al. 2008

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Indeed, recently, Jiang and Wang (2004) also found evidence for transience in prioritized selection and concluded that the memory trace for asynchrony rapidly decays allowing prioritized selection to occur only during a limited period of time. They did not vary the interval between the presentation of the new elements and the presentation of the target.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritizing selection of new elements: On the time course of the preview effect

Donk¹

2005

Visual Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The preview effect demonstrates that if observers in a visual search task are allowed a preview of a subset of elements before another subset of new elements is added, the first subset of elements does no longer compete for attentional selection. The aim of the present study was to investigate how long after the presentation of the new elements the preview effect can be preserved. Observers were presented with displays containing one set of elements (old elements) followed after a certain time interval by a second set of elements (new elements). Observers searched for the presence of a target among the new elements. The target appeared through an equiluminant colour change at varying intervals after the presentation of the new elements. The results indicated that the preview effect disappears beyond 200 ms after the presentation of the new elements. The results are discussed in terms of visual marking, temporal segregation, and onset capture.In everyday life, we are confronted with an enormous amount of visual information. Yet, our information processing capacity is limited. To behave efficiently, the visual system must select only that information that is relevant to the behavioural goals. That is, the visual system must attend to relevant and ignore irrelevant stimuli. A major question within the area of visual attention is how the observer manages to do so well in this respect. How does the visual system prioritize relevant information over irrelevant information? What information can be used to guide attentional selection and what is the mechanism underlying this attentional guidance?One likely candidate in the guidance of visual attention might be related tò`n ewness'' (e

show abstract

What Kind of Memory Supports Visual Marking?

Cited by 25 publications

References 47 publications

Visuospatial working memory mediates inhibitory and facilitatory guidance in preview search.

Visuospatial working memory mediates inhibitory and facilitatory guidance in preview search.

Out with the old: Inhibition of old items in a preview search is limited

Prioritizing selection of new elements: On the time course of the preview effect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About