Searching through subsets: a test of the visual indexing hypothesis.

This paper presents three experiments investigating the claim that the visual system utilizes a primitive indexing mechanism (sometimes called FINSTS; Pylyshyn, 1989) to make non-contiguous features directly accessible for further visual processing. This claim is investigated using a variant of the conjunction search task in which subjects search among a subset of the items in a conjunction search display for targets defined by a conjunction of colour and orientation. The members of the subset were identified by virtue of the late onset of the objects' place-holders. The cued subset was manipulated to include either homogeneous distractors or mixed distractors. Observers were able to select a subset of three items from among fifteen for further processing (Experiment 1); furthermore, a reaction time advantage for homogeneous subsets over mixed subsets was observed, indicating that more than one of the subset is selected for further specialized processing. The homogeneous subset advantage held for subsets of two to five items (Experiment 2), and the time required to process the cued subset did not increase with increased dispersion of the items (Experiment 3). These results support the basic claim of the indexing theory: the claim that multiple visual indexes are used in selecting objects for visual processing.

[1]  Jeremy M. Wolfe,et al.  Just Say No: How Are Visual Searches Terminated When There Is No Target Present? , 1996, Cognitive Psychology.

[2]  H. Pashler,et al.  Detecting conjunctions of color and form: Reassessing the serial search hypothesis , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[3]  A Treisman,et al.  Perceptual objects and the cost of filtering , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[4]  D. Homa,et al.  Reallocation of visual attention. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[5]  Susan L. Franzel,et al.  Guided search: an alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[6]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Reorienting attention across the horizontal and vertical meridians: Evidence in favor of a premotor theory of attention , 1987, Neuropsychologia.

[7]  J. Duncan,et al.  Visual search and stimulus similarity. , 1989, Psychological review.

[8]  M. Shaw,et al.  Optimal allocation of cognitive resources to spatial locations. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  M J Farah,et al.  Mechanisms of imagery-perception interaction. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  S. Yantis,et al.  Mechanisms of attentional selection: Temporally modulated priority tags , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[11]  J T Todd,et al.  Implications of a transient-sustained dichotomy for the measurement of human performance. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  Z. Pylyshyn.  The role of location indexes in spatial perception: A sketch of the FINST spatial-index model , 1989, Cognition.

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

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

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

[16]  P. Rabbitt.  Errors and error correction in choice-response tasks. , 1966, Journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  Drew H. Abney,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance Influence of Musical Groove on Postural Sway , 2015 .

[18]  J. Theeuwes.  Exogenous and endogenous control of attention: The effect of visual onsets and offsets , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[19]  G. Baylis,et al.  Movement and visual attention: the spotlight metaphor breaks down. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[20]  A. Treisman,et al.  Conjunction search revisited. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  H. Hughes,et al.  Spatial maps of directed visual attention. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[22]  G. Shulman,et al.  Moving attention through visual space. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[23]  B. Green,et al.  Color coding in a visual search task. , 1956, Journal of experimental psychology.

[24]  J. Beck,et al.  The effects of concentrated and distributed attention on peripheral acuity , 1973 .

[25]  P. Siple,et al.  Spatial constraints on the voluntary control of attention across visual space. , 1987, Canadian journal of psychology.

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

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

[28]  S. Yantis,et al.  Uniqueness of abrupt visual onset in capturing attention , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[29]  H. Egeth,et al.  Searching for conjunctively defined targets. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[30]  H. Egeth,et al.  Further evidence for a time-independent shift of the focus of attention , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[31]  Y. Tsal.  Movements of attention across the visual field. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[32]  R. Kirk.  Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences , 1970 .

[33]  U. Castiello,et al.  Splitting focal attention. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[35]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Visual marking: prioritizing selection for new objects by top-down attentional inhibition of old objects. , 1997, Psychological review.

[36]  D. LaBerge,et al.  Theory of attentional operations in shape identification. , 1989 .

[37]  C W Eriksen,et al.  Shifting of attentional focus within and about a visual display , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[38]  R. Klein,et al.  Is Posner's "beam" the same as Treisman's "glue"?: On the relation between visual orienting and feature integration theory. , 1987, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[39]  S. Ullman.  Visual routines , 1984, Cognition.

[40]  Z. Pylyshyn,et al.  What enumeration studies can show us about spatial attention: evidence for limited capacity preattentive processing. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[41]  R. Remington,et al.  Moving attention: Evidence for time-invariant shifts of visual selective attention , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[42]  U. Castiello,et al.  Size of the attentional focus and efficiency of processing. , 1990, Acta psychologica.

[43]  M. Posner,et al.  Attention and the detection of signals. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology.

[44]  B Julesz,et al.  "Where" and "what" in vision. , 1985, Science.

[45]  B. Julesz,et al.  Fast noninertial shifts of attention. , 1985, Spatial vision.

[46]  B. Julesz,et al.  Detection versus Discrimination of Visual Orientation , 1984, Perception.

[47]  S. Klein,et al.  Vernier acuity, crowding and cortical magnification , 1985, Vision Research.

[48]  D. LaBerge.  Spatial extent of attention to letters and words. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[49]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  Involuntary attentional capture by abrupt onsets , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[50]  J F Juola,et al.  Control of attention around the fovea. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[51]  A. Kramer,et al.  Splitting the Beam: Distribution of Attention Over Noncontiguous Regions of the Visual Field , 1995 .

[52]  Robert M. Boynton,et al.  Temporal analog of the minimally distinct border , 1978, Vision Research.

[53]  M. Posner,et al.  Orienting of Attention* , 1980, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[54]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Movement of attentional focus across the visual field: A critical look at the evidence , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[55]  A Treisman,et al.  Feature analysis in early vision: evidence from search asymmetries. , 1988, Psychological review.

[56]  D. Homa,et al.  Sensitization of the visual field. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[57]  S. Yantis,et al.  Mechanisms of attentional priority. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[58]  Z. Pylyshyn,et al.  Why are small and large numbers enumerated differently? A limited-capacity preattentive stage in vision. , 1994, Psychological review.

[59]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Guided Search 2.0 A revised model of visual search , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[60]  A. Kramer,et al.  Movement and focused attention: A failure to replicate , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[61]  Howard E. Egeth,et al.  Attention and Preattention , 1977 .

[62]  J. Henderson,et al.  Stimulus discrimination following covert attentional orienting to an exogenous cue. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[63]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Second-order parallel processing: visual search for the odd item in a subset. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[64]  J Miller,et al.  The control of attention by abrupt visual onsets and offsets , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.