Parallel Processing in Visual Search Asymmetry

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 3-27

  Dosher, Barbara Anne ^a   Han, Songmei ^a   Lu, Zhong Lin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COGNITION; ENVIRONMENT; EYE FIXATION; HUMAN; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; RANDOMIZATION; REACTION TIME; REVIEW; VISION;

COGNITION; ENVIRONMENT; FIXATION, OCULAR; HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; RANDOM ALLOCATION; REACTION TIME; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 1142302695     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.30.1.3     Document Type: Review

References (58)

1. Carrasco, M., Evert, D. L., Chang, I., & Katz, S. M. (1995). The eccentricity effect: Target eccentricity affects performance on conjunction searches. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 1241-1261.
2. Carrasco, M., McLean, T. L., Katz, S. M., & Frieder, K. S. (1998). Feature asymmetries in visual search: Effects of display duration, target eccentricity, orientation and spatial frequency. Vision Research, 38, 347-374.
3. Cave, K. R., & Wolfe, J. M. (1990). Modeling the role of parallel processing in visual search. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 225-271.
4. Chandler, J. D. (1969). Subroutine STEPIT: Finds local minima of a smooth function of several parameters. Behavioral Science, 14, 81-82.
5. Dosher, B. (1976). The retrieval of sentences from memory: A speed-accuracy study. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 291-310.
6. Dosher, B. (1979). Empirical approaches to information processing: Speed-accuracy tradeoff functions or reaction time. Acta Psychologica, 43, 347-359.
7. Dosher, B. (1981). The effect of delay and interference: A speed-accuracy study. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 551-582.
8. Dosher, B. (1982). Effect of sentence size and network distance on retrieval speed. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 8, 173-207.
9. Dosher, B. (1984). Degree of learning and retrieval speed: Study time and multiple exposures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 541-574.
10. Dosher, B. (1998). Models of visual search: Finding a face in the crowd. In D. N. Osherson (Series Ed.) & D. Scarborough & S. Sternberg (Vol. Eds.), Invitation to cognitive science: Vol. 4. Methods, models, and conceptual issues (2nd ed., pp. 455-521). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11. Dosher, B., Han, S., & Lu, Z.-L. (1998, November). Time course of visual search among homogeneous and heterogeneous distractors. Paper presented at the 39th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Dallas, TX.
12. Dosher, B., Han, S., & Lu, Z.-L. (2003). Time course of homogeneous and heterogeneous visual search. Unpublished manuscript.
13. Dosher, B., & McElree, B. (1992). Memory search: Retrieval processes in short-term and long-term recognition. In L. R. Squire (Ed.), Encyclopedia of learning and memory (pp. 398-406). New York: Macmillan.
14. Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433-458.
15. Eckstein, M. P. (1998). The lower visual search efficiency for conjunctions is due to noise and not serial attentional processing. Psychological Science, 9, 111-118.
16. Egeth, H., Virzi, R. A., & Garbart, H. (1984). Searching for conjunctively defined targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 32-39.
17. Geisler, W. S., & Chou, K. L. (1995). Separation of low-level and high-level factors in complex tasks: Visual search. Psychological Review, 102, 356-378.
18. Humphreys, G. W., & Muller, H. J. (1993). Search via recursive rejection (SERR): A connectionist model of visual search. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 43-110.
19. Luce, R. D. (1986). Response times. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
20. Macmillan, N., & Creelman, C. D. (1991). Detection theory: A user's guide. New York: Cambridge University Press.
21. McElree, B., & Carrasco, M. (1999). The temporal dynamics of visual search: Evidence for parallel processing in feature and conjunction searches. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1517-1539.
22. McElree, B., & Dosher, B. (1989). Serial position and set size in short-term memory: Time course of recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 346-373.
23. McElree, B., & Dosher, B. (1993). Serial retrieval processing in the recovery of order information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 291-315.
24. Miller, J. (1991). Channel interaction and the redundant-targets effect in bimodal divided attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 160-169.
25. Miller, J. (1996). The sampling distribution of d'. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 65-72.
26. Motter, B. C., & Belky, E. J. (1998). The zone of focal attention during active visual search. Vision Research, 38, 1007-1022.
27. Murdock, B. B., Jr. (1971). A parallel-processing model for scanning. Perception & Psychophysics, 10, 289-291.
28. Nagy, A. L., & Cone, S. M. (1996). Asymmetries in simple feature searches for color. Vision Research, 36, 2837-2847.
29. Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
30. Palmer, J. (1994). Set-size effects in visual search: The effect of attention is independent of the stimulus for simple tasks. Vision Research, 34, 1703-1721.
31. Palmer, J. (1995). Attention in visual search: Distinguishing four causes of a set-size effect. Current Direction in Psychological Science, 4, 118-123.
32. Palmer, J., Ames, C. T., & Lindsey, D. T. (1993). Measuring the effect of attention on simple visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 108-130.
33. Palmer, J., Verghese, P., & Pavel, M. (2000). The psychophysics of visual search. Vision Research, 40, 1227-1268.
34. Pashler, H. (1987). Detecting conjunctions of color and form: Reassessing the serial search hypothesis. Perception & Psychophysics, 41, 191-201.
35. Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59-108.
36. Reed, A. V. (1973, August 10). Speed-accuracy trade-off in recognition memory. Science, 181, 574-576.
37. Reed, A. V. (1976). List length and the time course of recognition in immediate memory. Memory & Cognition, 4, 16-30.
38. Rosenholtz, R. (2001). Search asymmetries? What search asymmetries? Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 476-489.
39. Rubenstein, B. S., & Sagi, D. (1990). Spatial variability as a limiting factor in texture-discrimination tasks: Implications for performance asymmetries. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 7, 1632-1643.
40. Rumelhart, D. E. (1970). A multicomponent theory of the perception of briefly exposed visual displays. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 7, 191-218.
41. Shaw, M. L. (1982). Attending to multiple sources of information: I. The integration of information in decision making. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 353-409.
42. Shaw, M. L., & Shaw, P. (1977). Optimal allocation of cognitive resources to spatial locations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 201-211.
43. Sperling, G. (1960). The information available in brief visual presentation. Psychological Monographs, 74(11, Whole No. 498).
44. Sperling, G., Budiansky, J., Spivak, J. G., & Johnson, M. C. (1971, October 15). Extremely rapid visual search: The maximum rate of scanning letters for the presence of a numeral. Science, 174, 307-311.
45. Sperling, G., & Dosher, B. (1986). Strategy and optimization in human information processing. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance (Vol. 1, pp. 1-65). New York: Wiley.
46. Sperling, G., & Weichselgartner, E. (1995). Episodic theory of the dynamics of spatial attention. Psychological Review, 102, 503-532.
47. Sutter, A., & Graham, N. V. (1995). Investigating simple and complex mechanisms in texture segregation using the speed-accuracy tradeoff method. Vision Research, 35, 2825-2843.
48. Sutter, A., & Hwang, D. (1999). A comparison of the dynamics of simple (Fourier) and complex (non-Fourier) mechanisms in texture segregation. Vision Research, 39, 1943-1962.
49. Townsend, J. T., & Ashby, F. G. (1983). The stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. New York: Cambridge University Press.
50. Treisman, A. M. (1988). Features and objects: The Fourteenth Bartlett Memorial Lecture. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 40(A), 201-237.
51. Treisman, A., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136.
52. Treisman, A., & Gormican, S. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries. Psychological Review, 95, 15-48.
53. Wannacott, T. H., & Wannacott, R. J. (1981). Regression: A second course in statistics. New York: Wiley.
54. Williams, D., & Julesz, B. (1992). Perceptual asymmetry in texture perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 89, 6531-6534.
55. Wolfe, J. M. (1994). Guided search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 202-238.
56. Wolfe, J. M. (2001). Asymmetries in visual search: An introduction. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 381-389.
57. Wolfe, J. M., & Friedman-Hill, S. R. (1992). Visual search for orientation: The role of angular relations between targets and distractors. Spatial Vision, 6, 199-208.
58. Wolfe, J. M., Friedman-Hill, S. R., Stewart, M. I., & O'Connell, K. M. (1992). The role of categorization in visual search for orientation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 34-49.