What is being masked in object substitution masking?

Object substitution masking (OSM) is said to occur when a perceptual object is hypothesized that is mismatched by subsequent sensory evidence, leading to a new hypothesized object being substituted for the first. For example, when a brief target is accompanied by a longer lasting display of nonoverlapping mask elements, reporting of target features may be impaired. J. T. Enns and V. Di Lollo (2000) considered it an outstanding question whether OSM masks some or all aspects of a target. The authors report three experiments demonstrating that OSM can selectively affect target features. Participants may be able to detect a target while being unable to report other aspects of it or to report the color but not the orientation of a target (or vice versa). We discuss these findings in relation to two other visual phenomena.

[1]  N Weisstein,et al.  Spatial characteristics of metacontrast. , 1972, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[2]  J. Enns,et al.  Object Substitution: A New Form of Masking in Unattended Visual Locations , 1997 .

[3]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  Spatial Repetition Blindness Is Modulated by Selective Attention to Color or Shape , 1995, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  Donald M. MacKay,et al.  Visual Stability and Voluntary Eye Movements , 1973 .

[5]  L L Jacoby,et al.  Invariance in automatic influences of memory: toward a user's guide for the process-dissociation procedure. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[6]  B. Scholl.  Objects and attention: the state of the art , 2001, Cognition.

[7]  J. Yellott,et al.  Color properties of the contrast flash effect: Monoptic vs dichoptic comparisons , 1976, Vision Research.

[8]  J. O'Regan,et al.  Solving the "real" mysteries of visual perception: the world as an outside memory. , 1992, Canadian journal of psychology.

[9]  Matthew S. Tata,et al.  Attend to it now or lose it forever: Selective attention, metacontrast masking, and object substitution , 2002, Perception & psychophysics.

[10]  Alejandro Lleras,et al.  On the role of object representations in substitution masking. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  Jason A. Droll,et al.  Task demands control acquisition and storage of visual information. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  Liana Machado,et al.  Visual detection is gated by attending for action: Evidence from hemispatial neglect , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[13]  R. Rafal,et al.  Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[14]  J. Enns,et al.  What’s new in visual masking? , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[15]  J. Duncan.  Selective attention and the organization of visual information , 1984 .

[16]  Keith A Hutchison,et al.  Masking by object substitution: dissociation of masking and cuing effects. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[17]  A. Treisman.  Features and Objects: The Fourteenth Bartlett Memorial Lecture , 1988, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[18]  James T Enns,et al.  Change detection in an attended face depends on the expectation of the observer. , 2003, Journal of vision.

[19]  T. Spencer,et al.  Evidence for an interruption theory of backward masking. , 1970, Journal of experimental psychology.

[20]  I. Biederman,et al.  A comparison of reaction time and verbal report in the detection of masked stimuli. , 1962, Journal of experimental psychology.

[21]  M. C. Smith,et al.  Detection in metacontrast. , 1966, Journal of experimental psychology.

[22]  C. Moore,et al.  When the target becomes the mask: using apparent motion to isolate the object-level component of object substitution masking. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[23]  Ronald A. Rensink.  Seeing, sensing, and scrutinizing , 2000, Vision Research.

[24]  J. Duncan.  Cooperating brain systems in selective perception and action. , 1996 .

[25]  J. Duncan,et al.  Beyond the search surface: visual search and attentional engagement. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[26]  H. Nothdurft.  Salience from feature contrast: additivity across dimensions , 2000, Vision Research.

[27]  William R. Uttal,et al.  On the physiological basis of masking with dotted visual noise1 , 1970 .

[28]  Bruno G. Breitmeyer,et al.  Visual masking : an integrative approach , 1984 .

[29]  Gordon D Logan,et al.  Cumulative progress in formal theories of attention. , 2004, Annual review of psychology.

[30]  J. Enns.  Object substitution and its relation to other forms of visual masking , 2004, Vision Research.

[31]  Matthew S. Tata,et al.  Warning: Attending to a mask may be hazardous to your perception , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[32]  N. Kanwisher.  Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token individuation , 1987, Cognition.

[33]  Gordon D. Logan,et al.  THE CODE THEORY OF VISUAL ATTENTION : AN INTEGRATION OF SPACE-BASED AND OBJECT-BASED ATTENTION , 1996 .

[34]  D. Raab,et al.  Reaction time to stimuli masked by metacontrast. , 1962, Journal of experimental psychology.

[35]  R. Melara,et al.  Attentional selection of objects or features: Evidence from a modified search task , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[36]  Ronald A. Rensink,et al.  Competition for consciousness among visual events: the psychophysics of reentrant visual processes. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[37]  Katherine M. Mathis,et al.  Gestalt grouping and common onset masking , 2002, Perception & psychophysics.

[38]  N. Lavie.  Distracted and confused?: Selective attention under load , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[39]  M. Sanders.  Handbook of Sensory Physiology , 1975 .

[40]  J. Wolfe,et al.  The Psychophysical Evidence for a Binding Problem in Human Vision , 1999, Neuron.

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

[42]  A. Treisman.  Modularity and attention: Is the binding problem real? , 1995 .

[43]  A. Treisman,et al.  Perceiving visually presented objets: recognition, awareness, and modularity , 1998, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.