Visual marking: dissociating effects of new and old set size.

Visual marking makes it possible to ignore old items during search. In a typical study, old items are previewed 1 s before adding an equal number of new items, one of which is the target. Previewing half of the items reduces the search slope relating response time (RT) to overall set size by half. However, this manipulation sometimes only reduces overall RT but not search slope (Experiment 1). By orthogonally varying the numbers of old and new items, Experiment 2 shows that old and new set sizes interactively affect visual marking. Given a constant new set size, the size of the old set has negligible effect on RT. However, increasing the new set size reduces the preview benefit in overall RT. Experiment 3 shows that this reduction may be restricted to paradigms that use temporal segregation cues. Studies should vary old and new set size orthogonally to avoid missing a visual marking effect where one may be present.

[1]  Derrick G. Watson,et al.  Visual marking: Evidence for inhibition using a probe-dot detection paradigm , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[2]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Visual Marking of Locations and Feature Maps: Evidence from Within-dimension Defined Conjunctions , 1999 .

[3]  M. Chun,et al.  Contextual Cueing: Implicit Learning and Memory of Visual Context Guides Spatial Attention , 1998, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  Derrick G. Watson,et al.  Visual marking of moving objects: a role for top-down feature-based inhibition in selection. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[5]  Steven M. J. Hunt,et al.  MacProbe: A Macintosh-based experimenter’s workstation for the cognitive sciences , 1994 .

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

[7]  L. Paquet,et al.  Evidence for early selection: Precuing target location reduces interference from same-category distractors , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[9]  S. Yantis,et al.  Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: evidence from visual search. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[11]  M. Chun,et al.  Visual marking: selective attention to asynchronous temporal groups. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  B. Gibson,et al.  Visual marking and the perception of salience in visual search , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[13]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Visual marking of old objects , 1998 .

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

[15]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  SEARCH FOR A CONJUNCTIVELY DEFINED TARGET CAN BE SELECTIVELY LIMITED TO A COLOR-DEFINED SUBSET OF ELEMENTS , 1995 .

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

[17]  J. Wolfe,et al.  What Can 1 Million Trials Tell Us About Visual Search? , 1998 .