Can we track holes?

The evidence is mixed as to whether the visual system treats objects and holes differently. We used a multiple object tracking task to test the hypothesis that figural objects are easier to track than holes. Observers tracked four of eight items (holes or objects). We used an adaptive algorithm to estimate the speed allowing 75% tracking accuracy. In Experiments 1-5, the distinction between holes and figures was accomplished by pictorial cues, while red-cyan anaglyphs were used to provide the illusion of depth in Experiment 6. We variously used Gaussian pixel noise, photographic scenes, or synthetic textures as backgrounds. Tracking was more difficult when a complex background was visible, as opposed to a blank background. Tracking was easier when disks carried fixed, unique markings. When these factors were controlled for, tracking holes was no more difficult than tracking figures, suggesting that they are equivalent stimuli for tracking purposes.

[1]  Marco Bertamini,et al.  The shape of holes , 2003, Cognition.

[2]  Marco Bertamini,et al.  Who Owns the Contour of a Visual Hole? , 2006, Perception.

[3]  Rolf Nelson,et al.  Figure – Ground Effects on Shape Memory for Objects versus Holes , 2008, Perception.

[4]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Tracking multiple targets with multifocal attention , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[5]  Richard D. Morey,et al.  Confidence Intervals from Normalized Data: A correction to Cousineau (2005) , 2008 .

[6]  Denis Cousineau,et al.  Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson's method , 2005 .

[7]  R. Rafal,et al.  Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[8]  Ronald A. Rensink,et al.  Early completion of occluded objects , 1998, Vision Research.

[9]  D G Pelli,et al.  Pixel independence: measuring spatial interactions on a CRT display. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[10]  P. King-Smith,et al.  Efficient and unbiased modifications of the QUEST threshold method: Theory, simulations, experimental evaluation and practical implementation , 1994, Vision Research.

[11]  B. Khurana.  Visual structure and the integration of form and color information. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  Markus Huff,et al.  Conflicting motion information impairs multiple object tracking. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[13]  Peter U Tse,et al.  The Bar — Cross — Ellipse Illusion: Alternating Percepts of Rigid and Nonrigid Motion Based on Contour Ownership and Trackable Feature Assignment , 2006, Perception.

[14]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Tracking unique objects , 2007, Perception & psychophysics.

[15]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[16]  Z. Pylyshyn,et al.  What is a visual object? Evidence from target merging in multiple object tracking , 2001, Cognition.

[17]  James R Pomerantz,et al.  Wholes, holes, and basic features in vision , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[18]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  A Parametric Texture Model Based on Joint Statistics of Complex Wavelet Coefficients , 2000, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[19]  Marco Bertamini,et al.  Amodal completion and visual holes (static and moving). , 2006, Acta psychologica.

[20]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Differences between searching among objects and searching among holes , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[21]  L Chen,et al.  Topological structure in visual perception. , 1982, Science.

[22]  B. Scholl,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article ATTENTIVE TRACKING OF OBJECTS VERSUS SUBSTANCES , 2022 .

[23]  Z. Pylyshyn,et al.  Tracking Multiple Items Through Occlusion: Clues to Visual Objecthood , 1999, Cognitive Psychology.

[24]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Preattentive Object Files: Shapeless Bundles of Basic Features , 1997, Vision Research.

[25]  Vincent J Chen,et al.  Subjective color from apparent motion. , 2002, Journal of vision.

[26]  Ronald A. Rensink,et al.  Preemption effects in visual search: evidence for low-level grouping. , 1995, Psychological review.

[27]  Paul Gewirtz,et al.  On “I Know It When I See It” , 1996 .

[28]  Marco Bertamini,et al.  Visual search for a circular region perceived as a figure versus as a hole: Evidence of the importance of part structure , 2006, Perception & psychophysics.

[29]  Yuhong Jiang,et al.  Feature binding in attentive tracking of distinct objects , 2009, Visual cognition.

[30]  Vincent J Chen,et al.  Depth from subjective color and apparent motion , 2002, Vision Research.

[31]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[32]  Alice R. Albrecht,et al.  Attentional selection and the representation of holes and objects. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[33]  R. Bakeman.  Recommended effect size statistics for repeated measures designs , 2005, Behavior research methods.

[34]  Don Dedrick,et al.  Computation, Cognition, and Pylyshyn , 2009 .

[35]  Z W Pylyshyn,et al.  Tracking multiple independent targets: evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. , 1988, Spatial vision.

[36]  Z. Pylyshyn.  Visual indexes, preconceptual objects, and situated vision , 2001, Cognition.

[37]  A. Watson,et al.  Quest: A Bayesian adaptive psychometric method , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[38]  B. Scholl.  What Have We Learned about Attention from Multiple-Object Tracking (and Vice Versa)? , 2009 .