Visual short-term memory operates more efficiently on boundary features than on surface features

A change detection task was used to estimate the visual short-term memory storage capacity for either the orientation or the size of objects. On each trial, several objects were briefly presented, followed by a blank interval and then by a second display of objects that either was identical to the first display or had a single object that was different (the object changed either orientation or size, in separate experiments). The task was to indicate whether the two displays were the same or different, and the number of objects remembered was estimated from the percent correct on this task. Storage capacity for a feature was nearly twice as large when that feature was defined by the object boundary, rather than by the surface texture of the object. This dramatic difference in storage capacity suggests that a particular feature (e.g., right tilted or small) is not stored in memory with an invariant abstract code. Instead, there appear to be different codes for the boundary and surface features of objects, and memory operates on boundary features more efficiently than it operates on surface features.

[1]  G. A. Miller.  THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[2]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[3]  J. Grier,et al.  Nonparametric indexes for sensitivity and bias: computing formulas. , 1971, Psychological bulletin.

[4]  H A Simon,et al.  How Big Is a Chunk? , 1974, Science.

[5]  W. A. Phillips.  On the distinction between sensory storage and short-term visual memory , 1974 .

[6]  S Grossberg,et al.  Neural dynamics of brightness perception: Features, boundaries, diffusion, and resonance , 1984, Perception & Psychophysics.

[7]  S Grossberg,et al.  Neural dynamics of perceptual grouping: Textures, boundaries, and emergent segmentations , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  S. Grossberg,et al.  Neural dynamics of form perception: boundary completion, illusory figures, and neon color spreading. , 1985, Psychological review.

[9]  I. Biederman.  Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. , 1987, Psychological review.

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

[11]  M. Greenlee,et al.  Perfect visual short-term memory for periodic patterns , 1990 .

[12]  J. Palmer.  Attentional limits on the perception and memory of visual information. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  C Kaernbach,et al.  Simple adaptive testing with the weighted up-down method , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  J. Wolfe,et al.  The role of categorization in visual search for orientation. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  Svem Magnussen,et al.  High-Fidelity Perceptual Long-Term Memory , 1994 .

[16]  Josef Kittler,et al.  Robust and Efficient Shape Indexing through Curvature Scale Space , 1996, BMVC.

[17]  Ken Nakayama,et al.  Attentional requirements in a ‘preattentive’ feature search task , 1997, Nature.

[18]  Edward K. Vogel,et al.  The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions , 1997, Nature.

[19]  S. H. Myhre,et al.  Representation of orientation and spatial frequency in perception and memory: a choice reaction-time analysis. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[20]  A. Needham.  The role of shape in 4-month-old infants’ object segregation , 1999 .

[21]  Stephen Grossberg,et al.  Spatial facilitation by color and luminance edges: boundary, surface, and attentional factors 1 Supported in part by Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Office of Naval Research (ONR N00014-95-1-0409 and ONR N00014-95-1-0657). 1 , 1999, Vision Research.

[22]  Michael J. Wright,et al.  Limitations for Change Detection in Multiple Gabor Targets , 2000 .

[23]  M. Chun,et al.  Organization of visual short-term memory. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[24]  Patrice D. Tremoulet,et al.  Infant individuation and identification of objects , 2000 .

[25]  G. Woodman,et al.  Storage of features, conjunctions and objects in visual working memory. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[26]  N. Cowan.  The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[27]  Latifur Khan,et al.  Object Boundary Detection For Ontology-Based Image Classification , 2002, MDM/KDD.

[28]  A. Hollingworth.  Failures of retrieval and comparison constrain change detection in natural scenes. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[29]  P. Walker,et al.  Visual memory for shape-colour conjunctions utilizes structural descriptions of letter shape , 2003 .

[30]  H. Spekreijse,et al.  Large capacity storage of integrated objects before change blindness , 2003, Vision Research.

[31]  Marvin M. Chun,et al.  Send Correspondence to , 2005 .

[32]  Stephen R Mitroff,et al.  Nothing compares 2 views: Change blindness can occur despite preserved access to the changed information , 2004, Perception & psychophysics.

[33]  W. Ma,et al.  A detection theory account of change detection. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[34]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  The Capacity of Visual Short-Term Memory is Set Both by Visual Information Load and by Number of Objects , 2004, Psychological science.

[35]  Capacity limit of visual working memory in parietal cortex reflects capacity limit of spatial selection , 2005 .