Do response time advantage and interference reflect the order of processing of global- and local-level information?

Navon’s (1977) global precedence hypothesis was based primarily on the joint occurrence of two effects: a response time (RT) advantage for identifying global targets, and interference by global distractors on responding to local targets. Although the hypothesis has been questioned on the basis of experiments in which it has been shown that a local RT advantage and local interference can occur, it is still frequently assumed that these two effects are a valid measure of the order in which local and global levels of structure are processed. In the present experiment, this assumption was examined. Subjects identified target letters that occurred randomly at the global or local level in a divided-attention task. The visual angle subtended by the stimulus pattern was varied, a manipulation known to affect the relative speed of response to local- or global-level information. Local targets were identified faster than global targets at the larger visual angles, but there was no difference in RT at the smallest visual angle. Despite this change in RT advantage, the interference effect did not change as a function of the visual angle of the stimulus pattern. Moreover, global distractors interfered with responding to local targets but local targets had no effect on responding to global targets, which is exactly the opposite of the finding one would expect if RT advantage and interference reflected order of processing. These findings are not consistent with the assumption that RT advantage and interference reflect order of processing in a simple way.

[1]  D. Navon,et al.  Do attention and decision follow perception Comment on Miller. , 1981, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[2]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task , 1974 .

[3]  D. Navon,et al.  Does global precedence really depend on visual angle? , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  Lynn C. Robertson,et al.  ‘Part-whole’ processing in unilateral brain- damaged patients: Dysfunction of hierarchical organization , 1986, Neuropsychologia.

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

[6]  L. Robertson,et al.  The effect of visual angle on global and local reaction times depends on the set of visual angles presented , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[7]  Lynn C. Robertson,et al.  Attention and interference in the processing of global and local information: Effects of unilateral temporal-parietal junction lesions , 1989, Neuropsychologia.

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

[9]  L. E. Krueger,et al.  Same-different judgments of foveal and parafoveal letter pairs by older adults , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[11]  L C Robertson,et al.  The processing of hierarchical stimuli: Effects of retinal locus, locational uncertainty, and stimulus identity , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[12]  D. Delis,et al.  Hemispheric specialization of memory for visual hierarchical stimuli , 1986, Neuropsychologia.

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

[14]  L. Robertson,et al.  Effects of lesions of temporal-parietal junction on perceptual and attentional processing in humans , 1988, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

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

[16]  G R Grice,et al.  Forest before trees? It depends where you look , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  Maryanne Martin,et al.  Hemispheric specialization for local and global processing , 1979, Neuropsychologia.

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

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

[20]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Response competition effects insame-different judgments , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.