Surfaces versus features in visual search

OFTEN implicit in the interpretation of visual search tasks is the assumption that the detection of targets is determined by the feature-coding properties of low-level visual processing1,2. But higher level processes have also been implicated as visual search ability is enhanced in a depth plane3 or when two-dimensional shapes are interpreted as three-dimensional forms4,5. Here we manipulate binocular disparity to degrade visual search, so that otherwise identical features become parts of surfaces through perceptual completion, rendering them less clearly distinguishable as targets and abstractors. Our results indicate that visual search has little or no access to the processing level of feature extraction but must have as an input a higher level process of surface representation.

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

[2]  Ronald A. Rensink,et al.  Sensitivity To Three-Dimensional Orientation in Visual Search , 1990 .

[3]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Amodal Representation of Occluded Surfaces: Role of Invisible Stimuli in Apparent Motion Correspondence , 1990, Perception.

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

[5]  Ken Nakayama,et al.  Serial and parallel processing of visual feature conjunctions , 1986, Nature.

[6]  R Fox,et al.  Depth separation and lateral interference , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[7]  K Nakayama,et al.  Stereoscopic Depth: Its Relation to Image Segmentation, Grouping, and the Recognition of Occluded Objects , 1989, Perception.

[8]  V. Ramachandran,et al.  On the perception of shape from shading , 1988, Nature.

[9]  A. Treisman,et al.  Search asymmetry: a diagnostic for preattentive processing of separable features. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[10]  J. Beck Effect of orientation and of shape similarity on perceptual grouping , 1966 .

[11]  K Nakayama,et al.  Toward a neural understanding of visual surface representation. , 1990, Cold Spring Harbor symposia on quantitative biology.

[12]  P Perona,et al.  Preattentive texture discrimination with early vision mechanisms. , 1990, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[13]  G. Kanizsa,et al.  Organization in Vision: Essays on Gestalt Perception , 1979 .

[14]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Occlusion and the solution to the aperture problem for motion , 1989, Vision Research.

[15]  James R. Bergen,et al.  Parallel versus serial processing in rapid pattern discrimination , 1983, Nature.