Abstract
We examined the generality of the claim that stereoscopic disparity is detectable in parallel across the visual field. Using a search paradigm with random-dot stereograms, we varied the relative disparity of target and distractor items. When both target and distractors had crossed disparities, both search functions (i.e., target in front of distractors and target behind distractors) were linear with positive slopes. When both target and distractors had uncrossed disparities, the pattern of results depended upon whether the target was in front of or behind the distractors—specifically, when the target was in front of the distractors, search functions were similar to those seen for “crossed” search, but when the target was behind the distractors, a nonlinear search function was found. Finally, when the target and distractors straddled the plane of fixation, a nonlinear search function was found when the target was in front of the distractors; however, when the target was behind the distractors, a linear search function with a large positive slope was found. We show that the nonlinear search functions are consistent with the effects of an intervening global surface percept. We also show that the size of the stimulus display may be a factor in some relative depth cases. Additionally, we replicate Steinman’s (1987) finding that search is parallel when the distractors are located at the plane of fixation and the target disparity is crossed, eliminating monocular and spatial cues to target presence that may have been present in his original study. In a final control experiment, we showed that reaction times did not increase with set size when observers performed another kind of perceptual task on similar random-dot stereogram displays. This eliminates the possibility that some of the results obtained here can be explained by increases in the difficulty of perceiving/fusing the stimuli when the number of distractors is increased.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andersen, G. J., &Kramer, A. F. (1993). Limits of focused attention in three-dimensional space.Perception & Psychophysics,53, 658–667.
Bravo, M. J., &Nakayama, K. (1992). The role of attention in different visual-search tasks.Perception & Psychophysics,51, 465–472.
Cavanagh, P., Arguin, M., &Treisman, A. (1990). Effect of surface medium on visual search for orientation and size features.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 479–491.
Cohen, A., &Ivry, R. B. (1991). Density effects in conjunction search: Evidence for a coarse location mechanism of feature integration.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 891–901.
Duncan, J., &Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity.Psychological Review,96, 433–458.
Egeth, H., Jonides, J., &Wall, S. (1972). Parallel processing of multielement displays.Cognitive Psychology,3, 674–698.
Erkelens, C. J. (1988). Fusional limits for a large random-dot stereogram.Vision Research,28, 345–353.
Frisby, J. P., Buckley, D., Wishart, K. A., Porrill, J., Garding, J., &Mayhew, J. E. (1995). Interaction of stereo and texture cues in the perception of three-dimensional steps.Vision Research,35, 1463–1472.
He, Z., &Nakayama, K. (1992). Surfaces versus features in visual search.Nature,359, 231–233.
Ishigushi, A., &Wolfe, J. M. (1993). Asymmetrical effect of crossed and uncrossed disparity on stereoscopic capture.Perception,22, 1403–1413.
Julesz, B. (1964). Binocular depth perception without familiarity cues.Science,145, 356–362.
Mitchell, D. E. (1966). A review of the concept of Panum’s fusional areas.American Journal of Optometry,43, 387–401.
Nakayama, K., &Silverman, G. H. (1986). Serial and parallel processing of visual feature conjunctions.Nature,320, 253–254.
O’Toole, A. J., &Kersten, D. J. (1992). Learning to see random-dot stereograms.Perception,21, 227–243.
Ramachandran, V. S. (1976). Learning-like phenomena in stereopsis.Nature,262, 392–394.
Ramachandran, V. S. (1988). Perception of shape from shading.Nature,331, 163–166.
Richards, W. (1970). Stereopsis and stereoblindness.Experimental Brain Research,10, 380–388.
Richards, W. (1971). Anomalous stereoscopic depth perception.Journal of the Optical Society of America,61, 410–414.
Steinman, S. B. (1987). Serial or parallel search in pattern vision.Perception,16, 389–398.
Theeuwes, J. (1994). Endogenous and exogenous control of visual attention.Perception,23, 429–440.
Townsend, J. T. (1971). A note on the identifiability of parallel and serial processes.Perception & Psychophysics,10, 161–163.
Townsend, J. T. (1990). Serial vs. parallel processing: Sometimes they look like Tweedledum and Tweedledee but they can (and should) be distinguished.Psychological Science,1, 46–54.
Treisman, A., Cavanagh, P., Fischer, B., Ramachandran, V., &von der Heydt, R. (1990). Form perception and attention: Striate cortex and beyond. In L. Spillmann & J. S. Werner (Eds.),Visual perception: The neurophysiological foundations (pp. 273–316). San Diego: Academic Press.
Treisman, A., &Gormican, S. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries.Psychological Review,95, 15–48.
Treisman, A., &Sato, S. (1990). Conjunction search revisited.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 459–478.
Treisman, A., &Souther, J. (1985). Search asymmetry: A diagnostic for preattentive processing of separable features.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,114, 285–310.
Westheimer, G. (1979). Cooperative neural processes involved in stereoscopic acuity.Experimental Brain Research,36, 585–597.
Wolfe, J. M. (1992). “Effortless” texture segmentation and “parallel” visual search are not the same thing.Vision Research,32, 757–763.
Wolfe, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 202–238.
Wolfe, J. M., Cave, K. R., &Franzel, S. L. (1989). Guided Search: An alternative to the feature integration model for visual search.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,15, 419–433.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
O’Toole, A.J., Walker, C.L. On the preattentive accessibility of stereoscopic disparity: Evidence from visual search. Perception & Psychophysics 59, 202–218 (1997). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211889
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211889