The interaction of objective and subjective organizations in a localization search task

We investigated how both objective and subjective organizations affect perceptual organization and how this perceptual organization, in turn, influences observers’ performance in a localization search task. Two groups of observers viewing exactly the same stimuli (objective organization) performed in significantly different ways, depending on how they were induced to parse the display (subjective organization). In Experiments 1 and 2, the observers were asked to describe the location of a tilted target among a varying number of vertical or horizontal distractors. Subjective organization was induced by instructing observers to parse the display into either three horizontal regions (rows) or three vertical regions (columns). The position of the target was critical: location performance, as assessed by reaction time and errors, was consistently impaired at the locations adjacent to the boundaries defining the regions, producing what we refer to as thesubjective boundary effect. Furthermore, the extent of this effect depended on whether the stimulus-driven and conceptually driven information concurred or conflicted. This made location information more or less accessible. In Experiment 1, the strength of objective grouping was a function of the proximity of the items (near or far conditions) and their orientation in a 6×6 matrix. In Experiment 2, the strength of objective grouping was a function of similarity of color (items were color coded by rows or by columns) and the orientation of the items in a 9×9 matrix. The subjective boundary effect was more pronounced when the display promoted grouping in the direction orthogonal to that of the task (e.g., when observers parsed by rows but vertical distractors were closer together [Experiment 1] or color coded [Experiment 2] to induce global columns). In contrast, this effect decreased when the direction of both objective and subjective organizations was parallel (e.g., when observers parsed by rows and horizontal distractors were closer together [Experiment 1] or were color coded [Experiment 2] to induce global rows). A localization search task proved to be an ideal forum in which objective and subjective organizations interacted. We discuss how these results indicated that observers’ performance in a localization task was determined by the interaction of objective and subjective organizations, and that the resulting perceptual organization constrained coarse location information.

[1]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Some factors determining efficiency of selective attention. , 1970 .

[2]  James R. Bergen,et al.  Parallel versus serial processing in rapid pattern discrimination , 1983, Nature.

[3]  M. Bravo,et al.  Preattentive Vision and Perceptual Groups , 1990, Perception.

[4]  Ken Nakayama,et al.  Serial and parallel processing of visual feature conjunctions , 1986, Nature.

[5]  S. Yantis Multielement visual tracking: Attention and perceptual organization , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[6]  A Cohen,et al.  Density effects in conjunction search: evidence for a coarse location mechanism of feature integration. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  G. Baylis,et al.  Visual attention and objects: evidence for hierarchical coding of location. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  J. Duncan,et al.  Beyond the search surface: visual search and attentional engagement. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  B. Julesz,et al.  Detection versus Discrimination of Visual Orientation , 1984, Perception.

[10]  S W Keele,et al.  Tests of a temporal theory of attentional binding. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  M. Wertheimer Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt. II , 1923 .

[12]  Ronald A. Rensink,et al.  Influence of scene-based properties on visual search. , 1990, Science.

[13]  F. Attneave Multistability in perception. , 1971, Scientific American.

[14]  J. Wolfe The Parallel Guidance of Visual Attention , 1992 .

[15]  W Prinzmetal,et al.  Principles of feature integration in visual perception , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  C W ERIKSEN,et al.  Object location in a complex perceptual field. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  H. Pashler,et al.  Close binding of identity and location in visual feature perception. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  S. Palmer,et al.  Rethinking perceptual organization: The role of uniform connectedness , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[19]  Mary A. Peterson,et al.  Opposed-set measurement procedure: A quantitative analysis of the role of local cues and intention in form perception. , 1983 .

[20]  B. Keysar,et al.  Functional theory of illusory conjunctions and neon colors. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

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

[22]  W. Estes,et al.  Effects of spaces on report from tachistoscopically presented letter strings , 1971 .

[23]  O J Braddick,et al.  ‘Where’ and ‘What’ in Visual Search , 1989, Perception.

[24]  R. Ivry,et al.  Effect of feature similarity on illusory conjunctions , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[25]  Y Tsal,et al.  On interpreting the effects of location preknowledge: A critique of Duncan , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[26]  B. Julesz Spatial nonlinearities in the instantaneous perception of textures with identical power spectra. , 1980, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[27]  Arthur P. Ginsburg,et al.  Spatial filtering and visual form perception. , 1986 .

[28]  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.

[29]  Jon Driver,et al.  Visual search for a conjunction of movement and form is parallel , 1988, Nature.

[30]  G Wolford,et al.  Perturbation model for letter identification. , 1975, Psychological review.

[31]  Ronald A. Rensink,et al.  VSearch Color: Full-color visual search experiments on the Macintosh II , 1991, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers.

[32]  Max Wertheimer,et al.  Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt , .

[33]  William D. Hitt An Evaluation of Five Different Abstract Coding Methods—Experiment IV1 , 1961 .

[34]  D. Sagi Detection of an orientation singularity in gabor textures: Effect of signal density and spatial-frequency , 1990, Vision Research.

[35]  C Bundesen,et al.  Color segregation and visual search , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[36]  M. Carrasco,et al.  The eccentricity effect: Target eccentricity affects performance on conjunction searches , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

[37]  K H Shum,et al.  Evidence for feature perturbations , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[39]  J. R. Pomerantz,et al.  Grouping by proximity: Selective attention measures , 1975 .

[40]  B Julesz,et al.  "Where" and "what" in vision. , 1985, Science.

[41]  F. Wilkinson,et al.  Distractor Ratio and Grouping Processes in Visual Conjunction Search , 1992, Perception.

[42]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Guided Search 2.0 A revised model of visual search , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[43]  R. Ivry,et al.  Illusory conjunctions inside and outside the focus of attention. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[44]  G. Chastain Evidence for feature perturbations from character misidentifications , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

[45]  G W Humphreys,et al.  Visual search for targets defined by combinations of color, shape, and size: An examination of the task constraints on feature and conjunction searches , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[46]  A. Treisman,et al.  Illusory conjunctions in the perception of objects , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[47]  R. A. Kinchla,et al.  The role of structural redundancy in the perception of visual targets , 1977 .

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

[49]  D. Sagi,et al.  Visual attention and perceptual grouping , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[50]  A. H. C. van der Heijden,et al.  The role of position in object selection in vision , 1993 .

[51]  J. Duncan Selective attention and the organization of visual information. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[52]  G. J. van der Wildt,et al.  Contrast sensitivity as a function of position on the retina , 1980, Vision Research.

[53]  William Prinzmetal,et al.  Good continuation affects visual detection , 1977 .

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

[55]  J. Beck Perceptual grouping produced by line figures , 1967 .

[56]  S. Coren,et al.  Principles of perceptual organization and spatial distortion: the gestalt illusions. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[57]  G W Humphreys,et al.  Grouping processes in visual search: effects with single- and combined-feature targets. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[58]  D H Hubel,et al.  Brain mechanisms of vision. , 1979, Scientific American.

[59]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[60]  A. Treisman Perceptual grouping and attention in visual search for features and for objects. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[61]  C. W. Parkin,et al.  The Magnetism of the Moon , 1971 .

[62]  William Prinzmetal,et al.  Configurational effects in visual information processing , 1976 .

[63]  C W ERIKSEN,et al.  Location of objects in a visual display as a function of the number of dimensions on which the objects differ. , 1952, Journal of experimental psychology.

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

[65]  J. Beck Effect of orientation and of shape similarity on perceptual grouping , 1966 .

[66]  Charles Folk,et al.  Spatial parallelism in the processing of lines, letters, and lexicality. , 1989 .

[67]  I. Rock,et al.  Perceptual organization and attention , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[68]  Marc Green,et al.  Visual Search: Detection, Identification, and Localization , 1992, Perception.

[69]  E. Farmer,et al.  Visual search through color displays: Effects of target-background similarity and background uniformity , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

[70]  A. Hendrickson,et al.  Distribution of cones in human and monkey retina: individual variability and radial asymmetry. , 1987, Science.