Global precedence in attention and decision.

This article examines the order in which people recognize and respond to different levels of structure within a visual display. Certain previous experiments have been interpreted as showing that information about global characteristics of an array is extracted by the visual system before information about local characteristics. Results from a task in which the observer must attend to both global and local information demonstrate that local information has a large influence on reaction time even when information at the global level is sufficient to determine the response. This finding implies that local information becomes available to decision processes with a time course similar to that of global information. Effects previously attributed to the order in which different levels of structure are recognized may result from differential ease of directing attention to these different levels and selecting responses based on them. Language: en

[1]  W. R. Garner,et al.  Operationism and the concept of perception. , 1956, Psychological review.

[2]  A. Treisman.  VERBAL CUES, LANGUAGE, AND MEANING IN SELECTIVE ATTENTION. , 1964, The American journal of psychology.

[3]  D. Norman,et al.  Memory And Attention , 1968 .

[4]  Howard E. Egeth,et al.  Differential effects of familiarity on judgments of sameness and difference , 1971 .

[5]  R. Shor,et al.  Symbol Processing Speed Differences and Symbol Interference Effects in a Variety of Concept Domains. , 1971, The Journal of general psychology.

[6]  G. Lockhead.  Processing dimensional stimuli: a note. , 1972, Psychological review.

[7]  R. A. Kinchla,et al.  Detecting target elements in multielement arrays: A confusability model , 1974 .

[8]  D. Tolhurst,et al.  Reaction times in the detection of gratings by human observers: A probabilistic mechanism , 1975, Vision Research.

[9]  G Wolford,et al.  Perturbation model for letter identification. , 1975, Psychological review.

[10]  Daniel G Bobrow,et al.  On data-limited and resource-limited processes , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[11]  D. A. Taylor.  Effect of identity in the multiletter matching task. , 1976, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  William Prinzmetal,et al.  Configurational effects in visual information processing , 1976 .

[13]  B G Breitmeyer,et al.  Implications of sustained and transient channels for theories of visual pattern masking, saccadic suppression, and information processing. , 1976, Psychological review.

[14]  Feature analysis and the growth of a percept. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  Lawrence C. Sager,et al.  Perception of wholes and of their component parts: some configural superiority effects. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  Carol L. Krumhansl.  Naming and locating simultaneously and sequentially presented letters , 1977 .

[17]  William Prinzmetal,et al.  Good continuation affects visual detection , 1977 .

[18]  Elizabeth L Bjork,et al.  On the nature of input channels in visual processing. , 1977, Psychological review.

[19]  R. A. Kinchla,et al.  The role of structural redundancy in the perception of visual targets , 1977 .

[20]  Carol L. Krumhansl,et al.  Effect of level of confusability on reporting letters from briefly presented visual displays , 1977 .

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

[22]  S E Palmer,et al.  Structural aspects of visual similarity , 1978, Memory & cognition.

[23]  J. Miller,et al.  Multidimensional same--different judgments: evidence against independent comparisons of dimensions. , 1978, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[24]  C W Eriksen,et al.  Information processing in visual search: A continuous flow conception and experimental results , 1979, Perception & psychophysics.

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

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

[27]  J E Hoffman,et al.  Interaction between global and local levels of a form. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[28]  R Blake,et al.  Estimating probability summation for binocular reaction time data , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

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