Separability and integrality of global and local levels of hierarchical patterns.

We used a constrained classification task to examine the perceptual relations between global and local levels in hierarchical patterns composed of many, relatively small elements and those composed of few, relatively large elements. In Experiments 1 and 3 subjects were asked to make classifications based on "form" or "texture." In Experiments 2 and 4 they were asked to classify according to the "shape" of the configuration or the elements. The results indicate that configural and elemental levels are perceptually separable for many-element patterns when processed as form and texture: Subjects could attend to either level without being affected by variation along the irrelevant dimension. However, when the same many-element patterns were processed for global and local shape, subjects could not selectively attend to either level. For few-element patterns, global configuration and local elements appeared to be perceptually integral dimensions. These results are relevant to two issues: the global precedence hypothesis and the explanations of integral and separable dimensions.

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

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

[3]  W. R. Garner.  The Processing of Information and Structure , 1974 .

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

[5]  J. Miller,et al.  Global precedence in attention and decision. , 1981, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[7]  E Goldmeier,et al.  Similarity in visually perceived forms. , 1972, Psychological issues.

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

[9]  M. Posner.  Chronometric explorations of mind , 1978 .

[10]  R. Gregory,et al.  HUMAN PERCEPTION. , 1964, British medical bulletin.

[11]  W. Köhler,et al.  The selected papers of Wolfgang Köhler , 1971 .

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

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

[14]  G. Keppel,et al.  Design and Analysis: A Researcher's Handbook , 1976 .

[15]  J. Beck.  Organization and representation in perception , 1982 .

[16]  James R. Pomerantz,et al.  Asymmetric integrality with dimensions of visual pattern , 1975 .

[17]  J. Robson,et al.  Application of fourier analysis to the visibility of gratings , 1968, The Journal of physiology.

[18]  B. Julesz.  Textons, the elements of texture perception, and their interactions , 1981, Nature.

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

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

[21]  B Julesz,et al.  Experiments in the visual perception of texture. , 1975, Scientific American.

[22]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Perception, cognition, and development : interactional analyses , 1984 .

[23]  W. R. Garner,et al.  Selective attention to attributes and to stimuli. , 1978, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[24]  K. D. De Valois,et al.  Spatial vision. , 1980, Annual review of psychology.

[25]  David Navon,et al.  The forest revisited: More on global precedence , 1981 .