The detail is in the difficulty: Challenging search facilitates rich incidental object encoding

When searching for objects in the environment, observers necessarily encounter other, nontarget, objects. Despite their irrelevance for search, observers often incidentally encode the details of these objects, an effect that is exaggerated as the search task becomes more challenging. Although it is well established that searchers create incidental memories for targets, less is known about the fidelity with which nontargets are remembered. Do observers store richly detailed representations of nontargets, or are these memories characterized by gist-level detail, containing only the information necessary to reject the item as a nontarget? We addressed this question across two experiments in which observers completed multiple-target (one to four potential targets) searches, followed by surprise alternative forced-choice (AFC) recognition tests for all encountered objects. To assess the detail of incidentally stored memories, we used similarity rankings derived from multidimensional scaling to manipulate the perceptual similarity across objects in 4-AFC (Experiment 1a) and 16-AFC (Experiments 1b and 2) tests. Replicating prior work, observers recognized more nontarget objects encountered during challenging, relative to easier, searches. More importantly, AFC results revealed that observers stored more than gist-level detail: When search objects were not recognized, observers systematically chose lures with higher perceptual similarity, reflecting partial encoding of the search object's perceptual features. Further, similarity effects increased with search difficulty, revealing that incidental memories for visual search objects are sharpened when the search task requires greater attentional processing.

[1]  W. Torgerson Multidimensional scaling: I. Theory and method , 1952 .

[2]  R. Shepard Recognition memory for words, sentences, and pictures , 1967 .

[3]  R. Haber,et al.  Perception and memory for pictures: Single-trial learning of 2500 visual stimuli , 1970 .

[4]  L. Standing Learning 10000 pictures , 1973 .

[5]  R. Nosofsky Choice, similarity, and the context theory of classification. , 1984 .

[6]  S. Shevell,et al.  Developmental changes in face processing: results from multidimensional scaling. , 1985, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[7]  R. Shepard,et al.  Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. , 1987, Science.

[8]  J. Duncan,et al.  Visual search and stimulus similarity. , 1989, Psychological review.

[9]  Susan L. Franzel,et al.  Guided search: an alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  T. Valentine The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology a Unified Account of the Effects of Distinctiveness, Inversion, and Race in Face Recognition , 2022 .

[11]  R. Nosofsky Similarity Scaling and Cognitive Process Models , 1992 .

[12]  J. Theeuwes Endogenous and Exogenous Control of Visual Selection , 1994, Perception.

[13]  J. Theeuwes Stimulus-driven capture and attentional set: selective search for color and visual abrupt onsets. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  R. Goldstone An efficient method for obtaining similarity data , 1994 .

[15]  S. Goldinger Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. , 1998, Psychological review.

[16]  J. Henderson,et al.  Accurate visual memory for previously attended objects in natural scenes , 2002 .

[17]  A. Yonelinas The Nature of Recollection and Familiarity: A Review of 30 Years of Research , 2002 .

[18]  A. Hollingworth Constructing visual representations of natural scenes: the roles of short- and long-term visual memory. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[19]  Carrick C. Williams,et al.  Incidental visual memory for targets and distractors in visual search , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  J. Henderson,et al.  Incidental visual memory for objects in scenes , 2005 .

[21]  Jason L Hicks,et al.  On the relationship between effort toward an ongoing task and cue detection in event-based prospective memory. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[22]  R. Marsh,et al.  Task interference in time-based, event-based, and dual intention prospective memory conditions☆ , 2005 .

[23]  James T. Enns,et al.  Relax! Cognitive strategy influences visual search , 2006 .

[24]  A. Hollingworth Visual memory for natural scenes: Evidence from change detection and visual search , 2006 .

[25]  Jason L. Hicks,et al.  Task interference from event-based intentions , 2006 .

[26]  S. Vogt,et al.  Long-term memory for 400 pictures on a common theme. , 2007, Experimental psychology.

[27]  Kyle R. Cave,et al.  Costs in Searching for Two Targets: Dividing Search Across Target Types Could Improve Airport Security Screening , 2007 .

[28]  Aude Oliva,et al.  Visual long-term memory has a massive storage capacity for object details , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[29]  Nick Donnelly,et al.  The cost of search for multiple targets: effects of practice and target similarity. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[30]  G. Zelinsky,et al.  Short article: Search guidance is proportional to the categorical specificity of a target cue , 2009, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[31]  Gregory J. Zelinsky,et al.  Visual search is guided to categorically-defined targets , 2009, Vision Research.

[32]  Carrick C. Williams Incidental and intentional visual memory: What memories are and are not affected by encoding tasks? , 2010 .

[33]  Timothy F. Brady,et al.  Conceptual Distinctiveness Supports Detailed Visual Long-term Memory for Real-world Objects the Fidelity of Long-term Memory for Visual Information , 2022 .

[34]  Stephen D. Goldinger,et al.  A multidimensional scaling analysis of own- and cross-race face spaces , 2010, Cognition.

[35]  Timothy F. Brady,et al.  Scene Memory Is More Detailed Than You Think : The Role of Categories in Visual Long-Term Memory , 2010 .

[36]  Stephen D. Goldinger,et al.  Learning in repeated visual search , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[37]  Robert G Alexander,et al.  Visual similarity effects in categorical search. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[38]  Eli Brenner,et al.  Speed judgments of three-dimensional motion incorporate extraretinal information. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[39]  D. Levi,et al.  Visual crowding: a fundamental limit on conscious perception and object recognition , 2011, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[40]  Gregory J. Zelinsky,et al.  Effects of part-based similarity on visual search: The Frankenbear experiment , 2012, Vision Research.

[41]  Michael C Hout,et al.  Incidental learning speeds visual search by lowering response thresholds, not by improving efficiency: evidence from eye movements. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[42]  Scott A. Guerin,et al.  Retrieval Failure Contributes to Gist-Based False Recognition. , 2012, Journal of memory and language.

[43]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  Default Bayes factors for ANOVA designs , 2012 .

[44]  Timothy F. Brady,et al.  Visual Long-Term Memory Has the Same Limit on Fidelity as Visual Working Memory , 2013, Psychological science.

[45]  Michael C. Hout,et al.  Multidimensional Scaling , 2003, Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology.

[46]  Michael C. Hout,et al.  The versatility of SpAM: a fast, efficient, spatial method of data collection for multidimensional scaling. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[47]  Timothy F. Brady,et al.  Real-world objects are not represented as bound units: independent forgetting of different object details from visual memory. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[48]  Mark D. Thomas,et al.  The target effect: Visual memory for unnamed search targets , 2014, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[49]  Michael C. Hout,et al.  Visual similarity is stronger than semantic similarity in guiding visual search for numbers , 2014, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[50]  Stephen D. Goldinger,et al.  MM-MDS: A Multidimensional Scaling Database with Similarity Ratings for 240 Object Categories from the Massive Memory Picture Database , 2014, PloS one.

[51]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Seek and you shall remember: scene semantics interact with visual search to build better memories. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[52]  Grigori Yourganov,et al.  The Perception of Naturalness Correlates with Low-Level Visual Features of Environmental Scenes , 2014, PloS one.

[53]  H. Egeth,et al.  Massive memory revisited: Limitations on storage capacity for object details in visual long-term memory , 2015, Learning & memory.

[54]  Too easy? The influence of task demands conveyed tacitly on prospective memory , 2015, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[55]  Phillip Wolff,et al.  Causal reasoning with forces , 2015, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[56]  Michael C Hout,et al.  Target templates: the precision of mental representations affects attentional guidance and decision-making in visual search , 2015, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[57]  S. Fleming,et al.  Explicit representation of confidence informs future value-based decisions , 2016, Nature Human Behaviour.

[58]  Michael C Hout,et al.  The Novel Object and Unusual Name (NOUN) Database: A collection of novel images for use in experimental research , 2016, Behavior research methods.

[59]  Dejan Draschkow,et al.  Gist in time: Scene semantics and structure enhance recall of searched objects. , 2016, Acta psychologica.

[60]  Tamaryn Menneer,et al.  Using multidimensional scaling to quantify similarity in visual search and beyond , 2015, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[61]  Michael C. Hout,et al.  SpAM is convenient but also satisfying: Reply to Verheyen et al. (2016). , 2016, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[62]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Five factors that guide attention in visual search , 2017, Nature Human Behaviour.

[63]  Task-relevant perceptual features can define categories in visual memory too , 2017, Memory & cognition.

[64]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I: Theoretical advantages and practical ramifications , 2017, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[65]  R. Luria,et al.  Different features of real-world objects are represented in a dependent manner in long-term memory. , 2019, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[66]  Dejan Draschkow,et al.  The lower bounds of massive memory: Investigating memory for object details after incidental encoding , 2018, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[67]  Megan H. Papesh,et al.  Incidental memory following rapid object processing: The role of attention allocation strategies. , 2019, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[68]  Michael C. Hout,et al.  Examining the effects of passive and active strategies on behavior during hybrid visual memory search: evidence from eye tracking , 2019, Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications.

[69]  Marc G. Berman,et al.  Psychological responses to natural patterns in architecture , 2019, Journal of Environmental Psychology.

[70]  Samuel M. McClure,et al.  Learning concepts when instances never repeat , 2018, Memory & cognition.

[71]  Timothy F. Brady,et al.  Independent storage of different features of real-world objects in long-term memory. , 2020, Journal of experimental psychology. General.