P‐31: Selective Attention Effects on Binocular Rivalry to Simple and Complex Dynamic Imagery

Selective attention increased the proportion of time that the attended members of a pair of either simple (gratings) or more complex (movie clips) dichoptic stimuli were visible during binocular rivalry. Lower‐level stimulus attributes appear to be more important than meaningfulness in directing attention, which is a finding that may have relevance to the design of head‐worn displays.

[1]  E. Peli.  Optometric and Perceptual Issues with Head-mounted Displays , 2010 .

[2]  Eli Peli,et al.  Inattentional blindness and augmented‐vision displays: effects of cartoon‐like filtering and attended scene , 2008, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[3]  Robert Fox,et al.  Binocular Rivalry and Head-Worn Displays , 2007, Hum. Factors.

[4]  Byron J. Pierce,et al.  Binocular Rivalry and Attention in Helmet-Mounted Display Applications , 2006 .

[5]  Byron J. Pierce,et al.  Perceptual Issues in the Use of Head-Mounted Visual Displays , 2006, Hum. Factors.

[6]  Byron J. Pierce,et al.  Visual suppression of monocularly presented symbology against a fused background in a simulation and training environment , 2006, SPIE Defense + Commercial Sensing.

[7]  R. Blake,et al.  Endogenous attention prolongs dominance durations in binocular rivalry. , 2005, Journal of vision.

[8]  J. E. Galletly,et al.  Helmet‐Mounted Displays and Sights , 2000 .

[9]  Zijiang J. He,et al.  Binocular Rivalry and Visual Awareness: The Role of Attention , 1999, Perception.

[10]  Randolph Blake,et al.  Binocular Rivalry and Motion Perception , 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[11]  I. Kovács,et al.  When the brain changes its mind: interocular grouping during binocular rivalry. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  T. Haslwanter.  Mathematics of three-dimensional eye rotations , 1995, Vision Research.

[13]  R. Blake,et al.  Do recognizable figures enjoy an advantage in binocular rivalry? , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  Eli Peli,et al.  Visual Issues In The Use Of A Head-Mounted Monocular Display , 1989, Other Conferences.

[15]  R. Blake.  Dichoptic reading: The role of meaning in binocular rivalry , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  R. Blake,et al.  Binocular rivalry and semantic processing: out of sight, out of mind. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[17]  U. Neisser,et al.  Selective looking: Attending to visually specified events , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[18]  A. Sanders.  Attention and performance III : proceedings of a symposium on attention and performance, held in Soesterberg August 4-8,1969, under the auspices of the Institute for Perception RVO-TNO, Soesterberg, the Netherlands , 1970 .

[19]  L. Lack.  The effect of practice on binocular rivalry control , 1969 .

[20]  A. H. Hastorf,et al.  The Effect of Meaning on Binocular Rivalry , 1959 .

[21]  E. Engel,et al.  The rôle content in binocular resolution. , 1956, The American journal of psychology.