Intra- and interpattern relations in letter recognition.

Strings of 4 unrelated letters were backward masked at varying durations to examine 3 major issues. (a) One issue concerned relational features. Letters with abnormal relations but normal elements were created by interchanging elements between large and small normal letters. Overall accuracy was higher for letters with normal relations, consistent with the idea that relational features are important in recognition. (b) Interpattern relations were examined by mixing large and small letters within strings. Relative to pure strings, accuracy was reduced, but only for small letters and only when in mixed strings. This effect can be attributed to attentional priority for larger forms over smaller forms, which also explains global precedence with hierarchical forms. (c) Forced-choice alternatives were manipulated in Experiments 2 and 3 to test feature integration theory. Relational information was found to be processed at least as early as feature presence or absence.

[1]  M. Posner Chronometric explorations of mind : the third Paul M. Fitts lectures, delivered at the University of Michigan, September 1976 , 1978 .

[2]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. , 1981 .

[3]  Wayne A. Wickelgren,et al.  Speed-accuracy tradeoff and information processing dynamics , 1977 .

[4]  G C Oden,et al.  A fuzzy logical model of letter identification. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[6]  Alexander I. Rudnicky,et al.  Size and case of type as stimuli in reading. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  H. Bouma Visual recognition of isolated lower-case letters. , 1971, Vision research.

[8]  J T Townsend,et al.  Experimental test of contemporary mathematical models of visual letter recognition. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

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

[11]  W. K. Estes,et al.  PERCEPTUAL PROCESSING IN LETTER RECOGNITION AND READING , 1978 .

[12]  P. Merikle,et al.  Global precedence in attended and nonattended objects. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[14]  George Wolford,et al.  Lateral masking in visual information processing , 1974 .

[15]  G. Keren,et al.  Recognition models of alphanumeric characters. , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  A. Treisman,et al.  Emergent features, attention, and object perception. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

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

[19]  L M Ward,et al.  Determinants of attention to local and global features of visual forms. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[21]  R Kimchi,et al.  Separability and integrality of global and local levels of hierarchical patterns. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[22]  Jeff Miller Global precedence in attention and decision. , 1981 .

[23]  S. Palmer Hierarchical structure in perceptual representation , 1977, Cognitive Psychology.

[24]  J. Rueckl,et al.  Making sentences make sense, or words to that effect , 1991 .

[25]  T. Sanocki,et al.  Font regularity constraints on the process of letter recognition. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[26]  Dominic W. Massaro,et al.  Visual Features, Preperceptual Storage, and Processing Time in Reading , 1975 .

[27]  C Bundesen,et al.  Visual selection from multielement displays: measuring and modeling effects of exposure duration. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[28]  G. Logan Attention and automaticity in Stroop and priming tasks: Theory and data , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[29]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: I , 1977 .

[30]  T. Sanocki Perception : Font-Specific , Schematic Tuning , 2011 .

[31]  S. Pinker,et al.  Visual cognition : An introduction * , 1989 .

[32]  L C Boer,et al.  Global precedence as a postperceptual effect: An analysis of speed-accuracy tradeoff functions , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

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

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

[35]  James T. Townsend Some characteristics of visual whole report behavior , 1981 .

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