Does partial difficult search help difficult search?

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 65, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 238-253

  Olds, Elizabeth S ^a   Degani, Mark D ^a  

^a WILFRID LAURIER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; HUMAN; MEMORY; PERCEPTION; RANDOMIZATION; VISION;

ATTENTION; HUMANS; MEMORY; RANDOM ALLOCATION; SIZE PERCEPTION; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 0037984101     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03194797     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. ARGUIN, M., & SAUMIER, D. (2000). Conjunction and linear non-separability effects in visual shape encoding. Vision Research, 40, 3099-3115.
2. BAUER, B., JOLICŒUR, P., & COWAN, W. B. (1996). Visual search for color targets that are or are not linearly separable from distractors. Vision Research, 36, 1439-1466.
3. BAUER, B., JOLICŒUR, P., & COWAN, W. B. (1999). Convex hull test of the linear separability hypothesis in visual search. Vision Research, 39, 2681-2695.
4. BRAINARD, D. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433-436.
5. CHUN, M. M., & JIANG. Y. (1999). Top-down attentional guidance based on implicit learning of visual covariation. Psychological Science, 10, 360-365.
6. DUNCAN, J., & HUMPHREYS, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433-458.
7. D'ZMURA, M. (1991). Color in visual search. Vision Research, 31, 951-966.
8. ECKSTEIN, M. P., THOMAS, J. P., PALMER, J., & SHIMOZAKI, S. S. (2000). A signal detection model predicts the effects of set size on visual search accuracy for feature, conjunction, triple conjunction, and disjunction displays. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 425-451.
9. HOROWITZ, T. S., & WOLFE, J. M. (1998a). Temporal transients disrupt attentional guidance but not serial search. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 39, S225.
10. HOROWITZ, T. S., & WOLFE, J. M. (1998b). Visual search has no memory. Nature, 394, 575-577.
11. HOROWITZ, T. S., & WOLFE, J. M. (2001). Search for multiple targets: Remember the targets, forget the search. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 272-285.
12. HUMPHREYS, G. W., & MULLER, H. J. (1993). SEarch via recursive rejection (SERR): A connectionist model of visual search. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 43-110.
13. KLEIN, R. [M.] (1988). Inhibitory tagging system facilitates visual search. Nature, 334, 430-431.
14. KLEIN, R. M., & MACINNES, W. J. (1999). Inhibition of return is a foraging facilitator in visual search. Psychological Science, 10, 346-352.
15. KRISTJANSSON, A. (2000). In search of remembrance: Evidence for memory in visual search. Psychological Science, 11, 328-332.
16. LUCK, S. J., & VOGEL, E. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390, 279-281.
17. MALJKOVIC, V., & NAKAYAMA, K. (1996). Priming of pop-out: II. The role of position. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 977-991.
18. NAKAYAMA, K., & JOSEPH, J. S. (1998). Attention, pattern recognition and popout in visual search. In R. Parasuraman (Ed.), The Attentive Brain (pp. 279-298). Cambridge: MIT Press.
19. NAKAYAMA, K., & SILVERMAN, O. H. (1986). Serial and parallel processing of visual feature conjunctions. Nature, 320, 264-265.
20. OLDS E. S., COWAN, W. B., & JOLICŒUR, P. (1999a). Effective CRT calibration techniques for perception research. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 16, 1501-1505.
21. OLDS, E. S., COWAN, W. B., & JOLICŒUR, P. (1999b). Stimulus-determined discrimination mechanisms for color search. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 1038-1045.
22. OLDS, E. S., COWAN, W. B., & JOLICŒUR, P. (2000a). The time-course of pop-out search. Vision Research, 40, 891-912.
23. OLDS, E. S., COWAN, W. B., & JOLICŒUR, P. (2000b). Tracking visual search over space and time. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 292-300.
24. OLDS, E. S., COWAN, W. B., & JOLICŒUR, P. (2000c). Visual search keeps track of where the target is not. Paper presented at the Canadian Society for Brain, Behavior & Cognitive Science annual meeting, Cambridge.
25. OLDS, E. S., JOLICŒUR, P., & COWAN, W. B. (2001). Interactions between search mechanisms in conjunction search. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55, 285-295.
26. OLDS, E. S., & PUNAMBOLAM, R. J. (2002). The decay and interruption of interactions between search mechanisms. Vision Research, 42, 747-760.
27. PALMER, J. (1995). Attention in visual search: Distinguishing four causes of a set-size effect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4, 118-123.
28. PALMER, S. E. (1999). Vision Science: Photons to phenomenology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. PYLYSHYN, Z. W. (2000). Situating vision in the world. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 197-207.
30. ROSENHOLTZ, R. (1999). A simple saliency model predicts a number of motion popout phenomena. Vision Research, 39, 3157-3163.
31. SHORE, D. I., & KLEIN, R. M. (2000). On the manifestations of memory in visual search. Spatial Vision, 14, 59-75.
32. TREISMAN, A. M., & GELADE, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136.
33. WOLFE, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 202-238.
34. WOLFE, J. M. (1998). What can 1 million trials tell us about visual search? Psychological Science, 9, 33-39.
35. 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.