A dual-task analysis of detection accuracy for the case of high target-distractor similarity: Further evidence for independent processing

Previous studies of visual detection performance indicate that perceptual span has a negligible effect on detection accuracy; hence, previous results suggest that individual characters within a multielement array are perceived independently. In this study, additional experimental factors were examined in order to determine whether conditions exist in which perceptual span influences detection performance: targets and distractors were chosen to be maximally similar, and detection accuracy was studied in relation to display size, target redundancy, and homogeneity of distractor characters. To test for perceptual span effects, a three-state model was proposed which incorporates the assumption that individual characters are perceived independently. The model may be applied to (a) both yes-no and forced-choice tasks, and (b) the case when effects of display characteristics differ for response alternatives. Predictions based on the three-state model agree satisfactorily with observed proportions. Moreover, interactions between display characteristics and response alternatives accord well with model predictions, and accuracy differences between subjects are consistent with individual differences in model parameters. The results provide further evidence for the independence assumption and illustrate additional conditions for which perceptual span has a negligible effect on detection accuracy.

[1]  W K Estes,et al.  A DETECTION METHOD AND PROBABILISTIC MODELS FOR ASSESSING INFORMATION PROCESSING FROM BRIEF VISUAL DISPLAYS , 1964 .

[2]  G. T. Gardner.  Evidence for independent parallel channels in tachistoscopic perception , 1973 .

[3]  John Holmgren.  Visual search with imperfect recognition , 1968 .

[4]  David E. Rumelhart,et al.  A multicomponent theory of the perception of briefly exposed visual displays , 1970 .

[5]  Wilson S. Geisler,et al.  Visual recognition in a theory of information processing. , 1973 .

[6]  George Sperling,et al.  The information available in brief visual presentations. , 1960 .

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

[8]  Charles W. Eriksen,et al.  The perception of multiple simultaneously presented forms as a function of foveal spacing , 1967 .

[9]  W. James,et al.  The Principles of Psychology. , 1983 .

[10]  H. BOUMA,et al.  Interaction Effects in Parafoveal Letter Recognition , 1970, Nature.

[11]  David R. Cox.  The analysis of binary data , 1970 .

[12]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  Visual processing capacity and attentional control. , 1972, Journal of experimental psychology.

[13]  William K. Estes,et al.  Interactions of signal and background variables in visual processing , 1972 .

[14]  Richard C. Atkinson,et al.  A LEARNING MODEL FOR FORCED-CHOICE DETECTION EXPERIMENTS1 , 1965 .

[15]  R A Monty,et al.  Visual confusion matrices: fact or artifact? , 1969, The Journal of psychology.

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

[17]  J. Townsend.  Theoretical analysis of an alphabetic confusion matrix , 1971 .

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

[19]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Rate of information processing in visual perception: some results and methodological considerations. , 1969, Journal of experimental psychology.

[20]  J. F. C. Kingman,et al.  The analysis of binary data , 1971 .

[21]  W. Estes,et al.  Visual detection in relation to display size and redundancy of critical elements I , 1966 .

[22]  John H. Halton.  An interpretation of negative probabilities , 1966 .