Abstract
Two issues concerning the effects of visual pattern goodness on information processing time were investigated: the role of memory vs. encoding and the role of individual stimulus goodness vs. stimulus similarity. A sequential “same-different” task was used to provide differentiation of target item or memory effects from display item or encoding effects. Experiment 1 used four alternative stimuli in each block of trials. The results showed that good patterns were processed faster than poor patterns for both “same” and “different” responses. Furthermore, the goodness of the target item had a greater effect on reaction time than did the goodness of the display item, indicating that memory is more important than encoding in producing faster processing of good stimuli. Effects of interstimulus similarity on processing time were minimal, although isolation of good stimuli in a similarity space could explain many of the results. Experiment 2 replicated the results of Experiment 1, despite the fact that differences in similarity space had been minimized by using only two alternative stimuli in each block. In addition, the speed of processing a “same” pair was essentially independent of the particular alternative stimulus in a block. These results suggest that in this task, there is a processing advantage for good stimuli that is stimulus specific, with the effect operating primarily in memory.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bell, H. H., &Handel, S. The role of pattern goodness in the reproduction of backward masked patterns.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1976,2, 139–150.
Checkosky, S. F., &Whitlock, D. The effects of pattern goodness on recognition time in a memory search task.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1973,100, 341–348.
Clement, D. E., &Varnadoe, K. W. Pattern uncertainty and the discrimination of visual patterns.Perception & Psychophysics, 1967,2, 427–431.
Garner, W. R.Uncertainty and structure as psychological concepts. New York: Wiley, 1962.
Garner, W. R.The processing of information and structure. Potomac, Md: Erlbaum, 1974.
Garner, W. R., &Clement, D. E. Goodness of pattern and pattern uncertainty.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1963,2, 446–452.
Garner, W. R., &Sutliff, D. The effects of goodness on encoding time in visual pattern discrimination.Perception & Psychophysics, 1974,16, 426–430.
King, M. C., Crist, W. B., &Lockhead, G. R. Context and goodness in a focusing task.Perception & Psychophysics, 1979,26, 305–311.
Krumhansl, C. L. Concerning the applicability of geometric models to similarity data: The interrelationship between similarity and spatial density.Psychological Review, 1978,85, 455–463.
Lockhead, G. R. Processing dimensional stimuli: A note.Psychological Review, 1972,79, 410–419.
Lockhead, G. R., &King, M. C. Classifying integral stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1977,3, 436–443.
Podgorny, P., &Garner, W. R. Reaction time as a measure of inter- and intraobject visual similarity: Letters of the alphabet.Perception & Psychophysics, 1979,26, 37–52.
Pomerantz, J. R. Pattern goodness and speed of encoding.Memory & Cognition, 1977,5, 235–241.
Ruth, D. S.The effects of pattern goodness on automatic and strategy dependent processes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Yale University, 1976.
Sternberg, S. Two operations in character recognition: Some evidence from reaction-time measurements.Perception & Psychophysics, 1967,2, 45–53.
Tversky, A. Features of similarity.Psychological Review, 1977,84, 327–352.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by Grant MH14229 from the National Institute of Mental Health to Yale University.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sebrechts, M.M., Garner, W.R. Stimulus-specific processing consequences of pattern goodness. Memory & Cognition 9, 41–49 (1981). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196950
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196950