Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-12-2004 | Original Article

Visual-memory search: An integrative perspective

Auteurs: Denis Cousineau, Serge Larochelle

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 1-2/2004

Abstract

A large, single-frame, visual-memory search experiment is reported in which memory and display loads of 1, 2, and 4 alphanumeric characters were factorially combined. In addition to the usual Consistent Mapping and Varied Mapping conditions, the experiment also involved a Categorical Varied Mapping condition in which different sets of stimuli switched roles as targets and distractors over trials. The stimuli used in these various mapping conditions were either digits, letters, or digits and letters. Analyses of the response time means obtained early and late in training suggest that the presence of categorical distinctions among the stimuli is the most important determinant of search efficiency. Comparison of the load effects on the response time means and on their standard deviations revealed a fairly constant ratio throughout the experimental conditions, which suggests that similar search processes may have been involved. A feature-based comparison model is indeed shown to account for the response time means obtained after extensive training under just about all training conditions, as well as for the ratios of load effects on means and standard deviations. According to the model, improvement in search efficiency results from a reduction in the number of features considered. The model’s performance questions the necessity to postulate qualitative differences between controlled and automatic processing, while the experiment forces a reassessment of the importance of the consistent mapping that underlies dual-process theories.

vorige artikel Attentional selection during preparation of eye movements

volgende artikel Stimulus-set location does not affect orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility

The expression stimulus-response mapping, often heard in the context of automatic attention attraction theory, is therefore somewhat misleading since it is stimulus-decision mapping that appears to be critical.

Since trials were randomized within blocks, one block constituted the smallest subset of trials within which all factors were balanced, thereby preventing us from considering only the first 72 or 144 trials, for instance.

It may be worth remembering that Schneider and Shiffrin did not report any statistical tests on their effects.

It could be argued that the comparisons involved in the ANOVA reported were unfair to participants in the CVM groups since there were twice as many different stimuli serving as targets in CVM conditions as in CM conditions. Consequently, the participants in CVM conditions received half as much practice per target as those in CM conditions. Such a difference may not be negligible. According to exemplar theories of learning (e.g., Logan, 1988, 1992; Nosofsky & Palmeri, 1997) and memory (Hintzman, 1986), amount of training per stimulus is much more critical to performance than total amount of practice. In order to equate amount of practice per target, we compared performance obtained on the 8th training block in each of the two CM conditions (HOMO, HETERO) to that obtained on the 16th training block in each of the two CVM conditions (HOMO-I and HETERO). The results of these analyses support the same conclusions as those described in the text: The M × D interaction was reliably smaller, though not yet absent, in condition CM-HOMO in Block 8 than it was in CVM-HOMO-I in Block 16. No such interaction was present under HETERO conditions.

In an early version of SFM, each feature of a given display item was tested in parallel with all the items in the memory set. The load effects obtained were generally too small compared with those observed in VM conditions.

Ashby, F. G. (1982). Deriving exact predictions from the cascade model. Psychological Review, 89, 599–607.CrossRef

Briggs, G. E., & Johnsen, A. M. (1973). On the nature of central processes in choice reactions. Memory & Cognition, 1, 91–100.

Bundesen, C. (1990). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97, 523–547.CrossRefPubMed

Cardosi, K. M. (1986). Some determining factors of the alphanumeric category effect. Perception and Psychophysics, 40, 317–330.PubMed

Cheng, P. W. (1985). Restructuring versus automaticity: Alternate accounts of skill acquisition. Psychological Review, 92, 414–423.CrossRef

Chun, M. M., & Wolfe, J. M. (1996). Just say no: How are visual searches terminated when there is no target present? Cognitive Psychology, 30, 39–78.CrossRefPubMed

Compton, B. J., & Logan, G. D. (1991). The transition from algorithm to retrieval in memory-based theories of automaticity. Memory & Cognition, 19, 151–158.

Cousineau, D., & Shiffrin, R. M. (2003). Termination of a difficult visual search. Vision Research (manuscript submitted for publication).

Czerwinski, M. Lightfoot, N., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1992). Automatization and training in visual search. American Journal of Psychology, 105, 271–315.PubMed

Delaney, P. F., Reder, L. M., Staszewski, J. J., & Ritter, F. E. (1998). The strategy-specific nature of improvement: The power law applies by strategy within task. Psychological Science, 9, 1–7.CrossRef

Dumais, S. T. (1979). Perceptual Learning in Automatic Detection: Processes and Mechanisms. Doctoral thesis, Indiana University.

Duncan, J. (1983). Category effects in visual search: A failure to replicate the “oh-zero” phenomenon. Perception and Psychophysics, 34, 221–232.PubMed

Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433–458.CrossRefPubMed

Fisher, D. L. (1984). Central capacity limits in consistent mapping, visual search tasks: Four channels or more? Cognitive Psychology, 16, 449–484.PubMed

Fisher, D. L. (1986). Hierarchical Models of Visual Search: Serial and Parallel Processing. Cambridge, MA: Society for Mathematical Psychology.

Fisher, D. L., Duffy, S. A., Young, C., & Pollatsek, A. (1988). Understanding the central processing limit in consistent-mapping visual search tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 253–266.CrossRefPubMed

Fisk, A. D., & Schneider, W. (1984). Consistent attending versus consistent responding in visual search: Task versus component consistency in automatic processing development. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 22, 330–332.

Haider, H., & Frensch, P. A. (1996). The role of information reduction in skill acquisition. Cognitive Psychology, 30, 304–337.CrossRefPubMed

Haider, H., & Frensch, P. A. (1999). Eye-movement during skill acquisition: More evidence for the information-reduction hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 25, 172–190.CrossRef

Heathcote, A., Brown, S. & Mewhort, D. J. K. (2000). The power law repealed: The case for an exponential law of practice. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 185–207.

Hintzman, D. L. (1986) “Schema abstraction” in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review, 93, 411–428.

Hockley, W. E. (1984). Analysis of response time distributions in the study of cognitive processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 10, 598–615.CrossRef

Hopkins, G. W., & Kristofferson, A. B. (1980). Ultrastable stimulus-reponse latencies: Acquisition and stimulus control. Perception and Psychophysics, 27, 241–250.PubMed

Horowitz, T. S., & Wolfe, J. M. (1998). Visual search has no memory. Nature, 394, 575–577PubMed

Humphreys, G. W., Quinlan, P. T., & Riddoch, M. J. (1989). Grouping processes in visual search: Effects with single- and combined-feature targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 258–279.

Jonides, J., & Gleitman, H. (1972). A conceptual category effect in visual search: o as letter or as digit. Perception and Psychophysics, 12, 457–460.

Kramer, A. F., Strayer, D. L., Buckley, J. (1990). Development and transfer of automatic processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 505–522.CrossRefPubMed

Krueger, L. E. (1984). The category effect in visual search depends on physical rather than conceptual differences. Perception and Psychophysics, 35, 558–564.PubMed

Kyllingsbaeck, S., Schneider, W. X., Bundesen, C. (2001). Automatic attraction of attention to former targets in visual displays of letters. Perception and Psychophysics, 63, 85–98.PubMed

Lassaline, M. E., & Logan, G. D. (1993). Memory-based automaticity in the discrimination of visual numerosity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19, 561–581.CrossRef

Logan, G. D. (1978). Attention in character-classification tasks: Evidence for the automaticity of component stages. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 107, 32–63.

Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492–527.CrossRef

Logan, G. D. (1990). Repetition priming and automaticity: common underlying mechanisms? Cognitive Psychology, 22, 1–35.

Logan, G. D. (1992). Shapes of reaction-time distributions and shapes of learning curves: A test of the instance theory of automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 883–914.

Logan, G. D. (1996). The CODE theory of visual attention: An integration of space-based and object-based attention. Psychological Review, 103, 603–649.PubMed

Logan, G. D., & Stadler, M. A. (1991). Mechanisms of performance improvement in consistent mapping memory search: Automaticity or strategy shift? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 478–496.

McCarley, J. S., Wang, R. F., Kramer, A. F., Irwing, D. E., & Peterson, M. S. (2003). How much memory does oculomotor search have? Psychological Science, 14, 422–426.CrossRefPubMed

McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception. I. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375–407.CrossRef

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.PubMed

Miller, J. (1988). A warning about median reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 539–543.CrossRefPubMed

Newell, A., & Rosenbloom, P. S. (1981). Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive Skills and their Acquisition (pp. 1–55). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Nosofsky, R. M., & Palmeri, T. J. (1997). An exemplar-based random walk model of speeded classification. Psychological Review, 104, 266–300.CrossRefPubMed

Palmeri, T. J. (1999). Theories of automaticity and the power law of practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 25, 543–551.CrossRef

Pylyshyn, Z. (1999). Is vision continuous with cognition? The case for cognitive impenetrability of visual perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 341–423.CrossRefPubMed

Rickard, T. C. (1997). Bending the power law: A CMPL theory of strategy shifts and the automatization of cognitive skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 288–311.

Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1982). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception. II. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model. Psychological Review, 89, 60–94.CrossRefPubMed

Schneider, W., & Fisk, A. D. (1982). Degree of consistent training: Improvements in search performance and automatic process development. Perception and Psychophysics, 31, 160–168.PubMed

Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing. I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84, 1–66.CrossRef

Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1985). Categorization (restructuring) and automatization: Two separable factors. Psychological Review, 92, 424–428.CrossRef

Shiffrin, R. M., & Dumais, S. T. (1981). The development of automatism. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition (pp. 111–140). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing. II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127–190.CrossRef

Shiffrin, R. M., Dumais, S. T., & Schneider, W. (1980). Characteristics of automatism. In R. S. Nickerson (Ed.), Attention and performance VIII (pp. 223–238). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Smith, E. E., & Medin, D. L. (1981) Categories and concepts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Sternberg, S. (1966). High-speed scanning in human memory. Science, 153, 652–654.PubMed

Townsend, J. T., & Ashby, F. G. (1983). Stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Townsend, J. T., & Colonius, H. (1997). Parallel processing response times and experimental determination of the stopping rule. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 41, 392–397.CrossRefPubMed

Treisman, A., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97–136.PubMed

Treisman, A., & Gormican, S. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries. Psychological Review, 95, 15–48.CrossRefPubMed

Treisman, A., & Sato, S. (1990). Conjunction search revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 459–478.CrossRefPubMed

Treisman, A., Vieira, A., & Hayes, A. (1992). Automaticity and preattentive processing. American Journal of Psychology, 105, 341–362.PubMed

Von Mühlenen, A., Müller, H. J., & Müller, D. (2003). Sit-and-wait strategies in dynamic visual search. Psychological Science, 14, 309–314.CrossRefPubMed

Ward, R., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). Conjunctive search for one and two identical targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 664–672.CrossRefPubMed

Ward, R., Duncan, J., & Shapiro, K. (1996). The slow time-course of visual attention. Cognitive Psychology, 30, 79–109.CrossRefPubMed

Wolfe, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 202–238.

Wolfe, J. M. (1998). What can 1 million trials tell us about visual search? Psychological Science, 9, 33–39.CrossRef

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 and Performance, 15, 419–433.CrossRefPubMed

Zenger, B., & Fahle, M. (1997). Missed targets are more frequent than false alarms: A model for error rates in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 1783–1791.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Visual-memory search: An integrative perspective
Auteurs: Denis Cousineau
Serge Larochelle
Publicatiedatum: 01-12-2004
Uitgeverij: Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 1-2/2004
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-003-0170-5

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 1-2/2004

Stimulus-set location does not affect orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility

Recognizing one’s own clapping: The role of temporal cues

Positive facial expressions are recognized faster than negative facial expressions, but why?

Forward masking of faces by spatially quantized random and structured masks: On the roles of wholistic configuration, local features, and spatial-frequency spectra in perceptual identification

Effects of binding in the identification of objects

Interaction of color and geometric cues in depth perception: When does “red” mean “near”?