The integration of object levels and their content: a theory of global/local processing and related hemispheric differences.

This article presents and tests the authors' integration hypothesis of global/local processing, which proposes that at early stages of processing, the identities of global and local units of a hierarchical stimulus are represented separately from information about their respective levels and that, therefore, identity and level information have to be integrated at later stages. It further states that the cerebral hemispheres differ in their capacities for these binding processes. Three experiments are reported in which the integration hypothesis was tested. Participants had to identify a letter at a prespecified level with the viewing duration restricted by a mask. False reporting of the letter at the nontarget level was predicted to occur more often when the integration of identity and level could fail. This was the case. Moreover, visual-field effects occurred, as expected. Finally, a multinomial model was constructed and fitted to the data.

[1]  R. Ivry,et al.  The two sides of perception , 1997 .

[2]  E. Yund,et al.  The role of spatial frequency in cued shifts of attention between global and local forms , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[3]  Ronald Hübner,et al.  Hemispheric Differences in Global/Local Processing Revealed by Same-Different Judgements , 1998 .

[4]  Max Wertheimer,et al.  Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt , .

[5]  Matthias M. Müller,et al.  Can the Spotlight of Attention Be Shaped Like a Doughnut? Evidence From Steady-State Visual Evoked Potentials , 2002 .

[6]  A Treisman,et al.  Feature binding, attention and object perception. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[7]  L. M. Ward.  Covert focussing of the attentionaL gaze. , 1985, Canadian journal of psychology.

[8]  S. Zeki.  Functional specialisation in the visual cortex of the rhesus monkey , 1978, Nature.

[9]  Bruno G. Breitmeyer,et al.  Simple reaction time as a measure of the temporal response properties of transient and sustained channels , 1975, Vision Research.

[10]  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.

[11]  S. Zeki.  A vision of the brain , 1993 .

[12]  R. S. J. Frackowiak,et al.  Hemispheric specialization for global and local processing: the effect of stimulus category , 1997, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[13]  William Prinzmetal,et al.  A measurement theory of illusory conjunctions. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  Ronald Hübner,et al.  The effect of response competition on functional hemispheric asymmetries for global/local processing , 2002, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[16]  E W Yund,et al.  The role of spatial frequency in the processing of hierarchically organized stimuli , 1993, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  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.

[18]  D. Alan Allport,et al.  SHIFTING INTENTIONAL SET - EXPLORING THE DYNAMIC CONTROL OF TASKS , 1994 .

[19]  R Hübner,et al.  On attentional control as a source of residual shift costs: evidence from two-component task shifts. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

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

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

[22]  I. Biederman,et al.  Size invariance in visual object priming , 1992 .

[23]  R. A. Kinchla,et al.  Detecting target elements in multielement arrays: A confusability model , 1974 .

[24]  Chikashi Michimata,et al.  Effects of Background Color on the Global and Local Processing of Hierarchically Organized Stimuli , 1999, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[25]  Lynn C. Robertson,et al.  Attention and interference in the processing of global and local information: Effects of unilateral temporal-parietal junction lesions , 1989, Neuropsychologia.

[26]  G. Yovel,et al.  Hemispheric asymmetries for global and local visual perception: effects of stimulus and task factors. , 2001 .

[27]  D. Bouwhuis,et al.  Attention and performance X : control of language processes , 1986 .

[28]  D. Broadbent.  Perception and communication , 1958 .

[29]  D L Woods,et al.  Hierarchical processing and level-repetition effect as indexed by early brain potentials. , 2000, Psychophysiology.

[30]  R. Hübner,et al.  Specific Effects of Spatial-frequency Uncertainty and Different Cue Types on Contrast Detection: Data and Models* * Parts of this research were presented at the 17th ECVP (European Conference on Visual Perception) held 1994 at Eindhoven, The Netherlands. , 1996, Vision Research.

[31]  A Buck,et al.  Hierarchical visual processing is dependent on the oculomotor system , 2000, Neuroreport.

[32]  G L Shulman,et al.  The Role of Spatial-Frequency Channels in the Perception of Local and Global Structure , 1986, Perception.

[33]  M. V. Kleeck.  Hemispheric differences in global versus local processing of hierarchical visual stimuli by normal subjects: New data and a meta-analysis of previous studies , 1989, Neuropsychologia.

[34]  Jeff Miller.  Global precedence in attention and decision. , 1981 .

[35]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

[36]  J E Hoffman,et al.  Interaction between global and local levels of a form. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[38]  Richard S. J. Frackowiak,et al.  Where in the brain does visual attention select the forest and the trees? , 1996, Nature.

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

[40]  M. Wertheimer.  Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt. II , 1923 .

[41]  W. McD.,et al.  Grundzüge der physiologischen Psychologie Principles of Physiological Psychology , 1905, Nature.

[42]  A Zani,et al.  Electrophysiological evidence of a perceptual precedence of global vs. local visual information. , 1998, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[43]  Maryanne Martin.  Local and global processing: The role of sparsity , 1979 .

[44]  D. Evert,et al.  Hemispheric asymmetries for global and local processing as a function of stimulus exposure duration , 2003, Brain and Cognition.

[45]  M. Moscovitch.  Information Processing and the Cerebral Hemispheres , 1979 .

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

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

[48]  D. Tolhurst.  Sustained and transient channels in human vision , 1975, Vision Research.

[49]  M. Lamb,et al.  Contributions of automatic and controlled processes to the analysis of hierarchical structure. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[50]  L O Harvey,et al.  Spatial frequencies and the cerebral hemispheres: Contrast sensitivity, visible persistence, and letter classification , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[51]  R. Hübner.  The efficiency of different cue types for reducing spatial-frequency uncertainty , 1996, Vision Research.

[52]  S Marrett,et al.  Local and global attention are mapped retinotopically in human occipital cortex. , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[53]  R. Kimchi.  Primacy of wholistic processing and global/local paradigm: a critical review. , 1992, Psychological bulletin.

[54]  R Ivry,et al.  A formal theory of feature binding in object perception. , 1996, Psychological review.

[55]  A. Keil,et al.  The influence of response competition on cerebral asymmetries for processing hierarchical stimuli revealed by ERP recordings , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.

[56]  H. Hughes,et al.  Asymmetric interference between components of suprathreshold compound gratings , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

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

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

[59]  T. Sanocki.  Interaction of scale and time during object identification. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[60]  W. Wundt,et al.  Grundzüge der physiologischen psyhcologie , 1893 .

[61]  Y. Zhuo,et al.  On the Different Processing of Wholes and Parts: A Psychophysiological Analysis , 1997, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

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

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

[64]  M. Posner,et al.  Components of visual orienting , 1984 .

[65]  Ronald Hübner.  Attention shifting between global and local target levels: The persistence of level-repetition effects , 2000 .

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

[67]  David B. Boles,et al.  Hemispheric Differences in Global versus Local Processing: Still Unclear , 1996, Brain and Cognition.

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

[69]  Maryanne Martin,et al.  Hemispheric specialization for local and global processing , 1979, Neuropsychologia.

[70]  A. Treisman,et al.  Illusory conjunctions in the perception of objects , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[71]  Fabrizio Doricchi,et al.  Seeing only the right half of the forest but cutting down all the trees? , 1998, Nature.

[72]  J. Sergent.  The cerebral balance of power: confrontation or cooperation? , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[73]  David M. Riefer,et al.  Multinomial processing models of source monitoring. , 1990 .

[74]  E. Yund,et al.  Attentional selection in the processing of hierarchical patterns: an ERP study , 2001, Biological Psychology.

[75]  D. Hubel,et al.  Segregation of form, color, movement, and depth: anatomy, physiology, and perception. , 1988, Science.

[76]  Matthias M. Müller,et al.  Can the spotlight of attention be shaped like a doughnut? Evidence from steady-state visual evoked potentials. , 2002, Psychological science.

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

[78]  L. Robertson,et al.  Attentional persistence for features of hierarchical patterns. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[79]  Colin M. Macleod.  Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. , 1991, Psychological bulletin.

[80]  Ronald Hübner,et al.  The effect of spatial frequency on global precedence and hemispheric differences , 1997, Perception & psychophysics.

[81]  G. Volberg,et al.  On the role of response conflicts and stimulus position for hemispheric differences in global/local processing: an ERP study , 2004, Neuropsychologia.

[82]  Sönke Johannes,et al.  Hierarchical visual stimuli: electrophysiological evidence for separate left hemispheric global and local processing mechanisms in humans , 1996, Neuroscience Letters.

[83]  R. Ivry,et al.  Sequential priming in hierarchically organized figures: effects of target level and target resolution. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[84]  L. Robertson,et al.  Neuropsychological contributions to theories of part/whole organization , 1991, Cognitive Psychology.

[85]  M. Mena.  Can certain stimulus characteristics influence the hemispheric differences in global and local processing , 1992 .

[86]  T. Stoffer,et al.  The time course of attentional zooming: A comparison of voluntary and involuntary allocation of attention to the levels of compound stimuli , 1993, Psychological research.

[87]  M. Lamb,et al.  Automatic and Controlled Processes in the Analysis of Hierarchical Structure , 1998 .

[88]  G. Mangun,et al.  Neural Mechanisms of Global and Local Processing: A Combined PET and ERP Study , 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[89]  L C Boer,et al.  Global precedence as a postperceptual effect: An analysis of speed-accuracy tradeoff functions , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[90]  Antígona Martínez,et al.  Hemispneric asymmetries in global and local processing: evidence from fMRI , 1997, Neuroreport.

[91]  F. Kitterle,et al.  Hemispheric differences in the interference among components of compound gratings , 1993, Perception & psychophysics.

[92]  E. William Yund,et al.  Spatial frequency and attention: Effects of level-, target-, and location-repetition on the processing of global and local forms , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.