On the Different Processing of Wholes and Parts: A Psychophysiological Analysis

The global precedence hypothesis (Navon, 1977) assumes that the processing of the global level of a hierarchical pattern precedes that of the local level. To explore further the nature of global and local processing of compound stimuli, we recorded the event-related brain potentials (ERPs) associated with ident@ing the global and local levels of nonlinguistic compound stimuli in a selective attention task. Wile subjects' behavioral responses were similar to those observed by Navon (1977), the analyses of ERP data showed that identification of the local level elicited longer N2 and P3 peak latencies with enhanced N2 and decreased P3 amplitudes relative to the identification of the global level. The inconsistency between the global and local levels made N2 and P3 amplitudes more negative with longer peak latencies. This interference effect on N2 and P3 amplitude and P3 latency was stronger on the local level than on the global level. The modulation of N2 by the consistency of the global and local levels observed in this and the previous (Heinze, Muente, et al., 1994) study suggests that the interference effect may be mediated by the early perceptual processing. Moreover, we found that the amplitude of an early posterior P1 component was modulated by attention to the global and local levels, being larger to the local target than to the global one. This PI effect gives no support to the notion that the variation of attentional spotlight determines the global precedence effect.

[1]  H. Hughes,et al.  Global Precedence, Spatial Frequency Channels, and the Statistics of Natural Images , 1996, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[2]  E. Bizzi,et al.  The Cognitive Neurosciences , 1996 .

[3]  D. Luna,et al.  Selective attention to global and local information: Effects of visual angle, exposure duration, and eccentricity on processing dominance , 1995 .

[4]  Lynn C. Robertson,et al.  The neurology of visual attention. , 1995 .

[5]  S. Luck,et al.  The role of attention in feature detection and conjunction discrimination: an electrophysiological analysis. , 1995, The International journal of neuroscience.

[6]  J G May,et al.  The time-course of global precedence and consistency effects. , 1995, The International journal of neuroscience.

[7]  S J Luck,et al.  Effects of spatial cuing on luminance detectability: psychophysical and electrophysiological evidence for early selection. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  Thomas F. Münte,et al.  The Order of Global- and Local-Level Information Processing: Electrophysiological Evidence for Parallel Perceptual Processes , 1994 .

[9]  Steven A. Hillyard,et al.  The Cuing of Attention to Visual Field Locations: Analysis with ERP Recordings , 1994 .

[10]  T. Stoffer.  Attentional zooming and the global-dominance phenomenon: Effects of level-specific cueing and abrupt visual onset , 1994, Psychological research.

[11]  Hans-Jochen Heinze,et al.  Attention to adjacent and separate positions in space: An electrophysiological analysis , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[12]  H. Heinze,et al.  Electrophysiological correlates of hierarchical stimulus processing: Dissociation between onset and later stages of global and local target processing , 1993, Neuropsychologia.

[13]  R. Egly,et al.  Spatial attention and cuing to global and local levels of hierarchical structure. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  S. Luck,et al.  Attention-Related Modulation of Sensory-Evoked Brain Activity in a Visual Search Task , 1993, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[15]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Modulations of sensory-evoked brain potentials indicate changes in perceptual processing during visual-spatial priming. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Allocation of visual attention to spatial locations: Tradeoff functions for event-related brain potentials and detection performance , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  L. Robertson,et al.  The effect of visual angle on global and local reaction times depends on the set of visual angles presented , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[18]  P. Reuter-Lorenz,et al.  Global Versus Local Processing in the Absence of Low Spatial Frequencies , 1990, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[19]  S J Luck,et al.  Visual event-related potentials index focused attention within bilateral stimulus arrays. I. Evidence for early selection. , 1990, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[20]  R. Knight,et al.  Component mechanisms underlying the processing of hierarchically organized patterns: inferences from patients with unilateral cortical lesions. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[21]  G. Romani,et al.  Neuromagnetic topography of photoconvulsive response in man. , 1990, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[22]  M R Lamb,et al.  Do response time advantage and interference reflect the order of processing of global- and local-level information? , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[23]  L. Robertson,et al.  Effects of lesions of temporal-parietal junction on perceptual and attentional processing in humans , 1988, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[24]  E. Donchin,et al.  Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating? , 1988, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[25]  L C Robertson,et al.  The processing of hierarchical stimuli: Effects of retinal locus, locational uncertainty, and stimulus identity , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[26]  P. Merikle,et al.  Global precedence in attended and nonattended objects. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[27]  O. G. Selfridge,et al.  Pandemonium: a paradigm for learning , 1988 .

[28]  J Wilson,et al.  Spatial Frequency and Selective Attention to Local and Global Information , 1987, Perception.

[29]  D. Delis,et al.  Hemispheric specialization of memory for visual hierarchical stimuli , 1986, Neuropsychologia.

[30]  M. Coles,et al.  Energetics and Human Information Processing , 1986 .

[31]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Allocation of attention in the visual field. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[32]  J. Baird,et al.  Global precedence in visual pattern recognition , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[33]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Selective attention to color and location: An analysis with event-related brain potentials , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[34]  D. Navon,et al.  Does global precedence really depend on visual angle? , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[35]  J. R. Pomerantz,et al.  Global and local precedence: selective attention in form and motion perception. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[36]  D Navon,et al.  How Many Trees Does it Take to Make a Forest? , 1983, Perception.

[37]  G R Grice,et al.  Forest before trees? It depends where you look , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[38]  L. M. Ward.  On processing dominance: Comment on Pomerantz. , 1983 .

[39]  Walter Ritter,et al.  6 On Relating Event-Related Potential Components to Stages of Information Processing* , 1983 .

[40]  R. A. Kinchla,et al.  Attending to different levels of structure in a visual image , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[41]  M. R. Harter,et al.  Hemispheric differences in the neural processing of stimulus location and type: Effects of selective attention on visual evoked potentials , 1982, Neuropsychologia.

[42]  F H Previc,et al.  Electrophysiological and behavioral indicants of selective attention to multifeature gratings , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[43]  L M Ward,et al.  Determinants of attention to local and global features of visual forms. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[44]  S. Palmer,et al.  Form and texture in hierarchically constructed patterns. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[45]  B Renault,et al.  Onset and offset of brain events as indices of mental chronometry. , 1982, Science.

[46]  B. Kopell,et al.  The Stroop effect: brain potentials localize the source of interference. , 1981, Science.

[47]  C. C. Duncan-Johnson.  Young Psychophysiologist Award address, 1980. P300 latency: a new metric of information processing. , 1981, Psychophysiology.

[48]  E Donchin,et al.  A metric for thought: a comparison of P300 latency and reaction time. , 1981, Science.

[49]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[50]  J. Wolfe,et al.  The order of visual processing: “Top-down,” “bottom-up,” or “middle-out” , 1979, Perception & psychophysics.

[51]  E. Donchin.  Event-related Brain Potentials: A Tool in the Study of Human Information Processing , 1979 .

[52]  F H Previc,et al.  Size-specific information channels and selective attention: visual evoked potential and behavioral measures. , 1978, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[53]  D. Navon.  Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception , 1977, Cognitive Psychology.

[54]  D. Broadbent.  The hidden preattentive processes. , 1977, The American psychologist.