The multi-item localization (MILO) task: Measuring the spatiotemporal context of vision for action

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 66, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 38-50

  Thornton, Ian M ^a   Horowitz, Todd S ^b,c  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR BIOLOGICAL CYBERNETICS   (Germany)

^b BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2142808363     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03194859     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. ADAM, J. J., NIEUWENSTEIN, J. H., HUYS, R., PAAS, F. G., KINGMA, H., WILLEMS, P., & WERRY, M. (2000). Control of rapid aimed hand movements: The one-target advantage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 295-312.
2. BRIAND, K. A., LARRISON, A. L., & SERENO, A. B. (2000). Inhibition of return in manual and saecadic response systems. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 1512-1524.
3. CHUN, M. M., & JIANG, Y. (1998). Contextual cueing: Implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention. Cognitive Psychology, 36, 28-71.
4. DONK, M., & THEEUWES, J. (2001). Visual marking beside the mark: Prioritizing selection by abrupt onsets. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 891-900.
5. DUNCAN, J., & HUMPHREYS, G. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433-458.
6. DUNCAN, J., & HUMPHREYS, G. (1992). Beyond the search surface: Visual search and attentional engagement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 578-588.
7. 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.
8. FISCHER, M. H., PRATT, J., & NEGGERS, S. F. W. (2003). Inhibition of return and manual pointing movements. Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 379-387.
9. FISCHER, M. H., ROSENBAUM, D. A., & VAUGHAN, J. (1997). Speed and sequential effects in reaching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 23, 404-428.
10. GIBSON, B. S., & JIANG, Y. (2001). Visual marking and the perception of salience in visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 59-73.
11. GIBSON, B. S., Li, L., SKOW, E., SALVAGNI, K., & COOKE, L. (2000). Memory-based tagging of targets during visual search for one versus two identical targets. Psychological Science, 11, 324-328.
12. GILCHRIST, I. D., & HARVEY, M. (2000). Refixation frequency and memory mechanisms in visual search. Current Biology, 10, 1209-1212.
13. GILCHRIST, I. D., NORTH, A., & HOOD, B. (2001). Is visual search really like foraging? Perception, 30, 1459-1464.
14. HILLSTROM, A. P. (2000). Repetition effects in visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 800-817.
15. HOLLINGWORTH, A., WILLIAMS, C. C., & HENDERSON, J. M. (2001). To see and remember: Visually specific information is retained in memory from previously attended objects in natural scenes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 761-768.
16. HOROWITZ, T. S., & WOLFE, J. M. (1998). Visual search has no memory. Nature, 394, 575-577.
17. HOROWITZ, T. S., & WOLFE, J. M. (2001). Search for multiple targets: Remember the targets, forget the search. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 272-285.
18. HOROWITZ, T. S., & WOLFE, J. M. (2003). Memory for rejected distractors in visual search? Visual Cognition, 10, 257-298.
19. HOWARD, L. A., LUPIÁÑEZ, J., & TIPPER, S. P. (1999). Inhibition of return in a selective reaching task: An investigation of reference frames. Journal of General Psychology, 126, 421-442.
20. KEULEN, R. F., ADAM, J. J., FISCHER, M. H., KUIPERS, H., & JOLLES, J. (2002). Selective reaching: Evidence for multiple frames of reference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 28, 515-526.
21. KLEIN, R. [M.] (1988). Inhibitory tagging system facilitates visual search. Nature, 334, 430-431.
22. KLEIN, R. M., & MACINNES, W. J. (1999). Inhibition of return is a foraging facilitator in visual search. Psychological Science, 10, 346-352.
23. KLEIN, R. M., & TAYLOR, T. L. (1994). Categories of cognitive inhibition with reference to attention. In D. Dagenbach & T. H. Carr (Eds.), Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language (pp. 113150). San Diego: Academic Press.
24. KRISTJÁNSSON, A. (2000). In search of remembrance: Evidence for memory in visual search. Psychological Science, 11, 328-332.
25. KRUEGER, L. E. (1984). The category effect in visual search depends on physical rather than conceptual differences. Perception & Psychophysics, 35, 558-564.
26. MALJKOVIC, V., & NAKAYAMA, K. (1994). Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features. Memory & Cognition, 22, 657-672.
27. MALJKOVIC, V., & NAKAYAMA, K. (1996). Priming of pop-out: II. Role of position. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 977-991.
28. MCAULIFFE, J., PRATT, J., & O'DONNELL, C. (2001). Examining location-based and object-based components of inhibition of return in static displays. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 1072-1082.
29. 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 & Performance, 25, 1517-1539.
30. MEEGAN, D. V., & TIPPER, S. P. (1998). Reaching into cluttered visual environments: Spatial and temporal influences of distracting objects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51 A, 225-249.
31. MEEOAN, D. V., & TIPPER, S. P. (1999). Visual search and target-directed action. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25, 1347-1362.
32. MOORE, C. M., EGETH, H., BEROLAN, L. R., & LUCK, S. J. (1996). Are attentional dwell times inconsistent with serial visual search? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 360-365.
33. MÜLLER, H., & VON MÜHLENEN, A. (2000). Probing distractor inhibition in visual search: Inhibition of return. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 1591-1605.
34. OH, S.-H., & KIM, M. S. (2002, July). Visual search efficiency is affected by spatial working memory. Paper presented at the Second Asian Conference on Vision, Gyeongju, Korea.
35. OJANPÄÄ, H., & NÄSÄNEN, R. (2002). Visual search and simultaneous short-term memory task [Abstract]. Perception, 31 (Suppl.), 174b.
36. OLIVERS, C. N. L., & HUMPHREYS, G. W. (2000). Visual marking is affected by the attentional blink. Perception, 29 (Suppl.), 62-63.
37. OLIVERS, C. N. L., HUMPHREYS, G. W., HEINKE, D., & COOPER, A. C. G. (2002). Prioritization in visual search: Visual marking is not dependent on a-mnemonic search. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 540-560.
38. OLSON, I. R., & CHUN, M. M. (2001). Temporal contextual cuing of visual attention, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27, 1299-1313.
39. PALMER, J. (1995). Attention in visual search: Distinguishing four causes of a set-size effect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4, 118-123.
40. PALMER, J., & MCLEAN, J. (1995, August). Imperfect, unlimited-capacity, parallel search yields large set-size effects. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society of Mathematical Psychology, Irvine, CA.
41. PELLI, D. G., & ZHANO, L. (1991). Accurate control of contrast on microcomputer displays. Vision Research, 31, 1337-1350.
42. PETERSON, M. S., KRAMER, A. F., WANG, R. F., IRWIN, D. E., & McCARLEY, J. S. (2001). Visual search has memory. Psychological Science, 12, 287-292.
43. POSNER, M. I., & COHEN, Y. (1984). Components of attention. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X (pp. 55-66). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
44. POSNER, M. I., RAFAL, R. D., CHOATE, L. S., & VAUGHAN, J. (1985). Inhibition of return: Neural basis and function. Cognitive Neuropsycholoy, 2, 211-228.
45. PRATT, J., & ABRAMS, R. A. (1994). Action-centered inhibition: Effects of distractors on movement planning and execution. Human Movement Science, 13, 245-254.
46. REITAN, R. M. (1958). The validity of the trial making test as an indicator of organic brain damage. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 9, 127-130.
47. RENSINK, R. A. (1990). Toolbox-based routines for Macintosh timing and display. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 22, 105-117.
48. RENSINK, R. A. (2000). Seeing, sensing, and scrutinizing. Vision Research, 40, 1469-1487.
49. RENSINK, R. A., O'REGAN, J. K., & CLARK, J. J. (2000). On the failure to detect changes in scenes across brief interruptions. Visual Cognition, 7,127-145.
50. RENSINK, R. A., & ENNS, J. T. (1995). Preemption effects in visual search: Evidence for low-level grouping. Psychological Review, 102, 101-130.
51. RICKER, K. L., ELLIOTT, D., LYONS, J., GAULDIE, D., CHUA, R., & BYBLOW, W. (1999). The utilization of visual information in the control of rapid sequential aiming movements. Acta Psychologica, 103, 103123.
52. Ro, T., & RAFAL, R. D. (1999). Components of reflexive visual orienting to moving objects. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 826-836.
53. SCHNEIDER, W., & SHIFFRIN, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention, Psychological Review, 84, 1-66.
54. SHORE, D. I., & KLEIN, R. M. (2000). On the manifestations of memory in visual search. Spatial Vision, 14, 59-75.
55. SNYDER, J. J., & KINGSTONE, A. (2000). Inhibition of return and visual search: How many separate loci are inhibited? Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 452-458.
56. STEINMAN, S. B., & NAWROT, M. (1992). Real-time color-frame anima tion for visual psychophysics on the Macintosh computer. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 24, 439-452.
57. TAKEDA, Y., & YAGI, A. (2000). Inhibitory tagging in visual search can be found if search stimuli remain visible. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 927-934.
58. TANAKA, Y., & SHIMOJO, S. (1996). Location versus feature: Reaction time reveals dissociation between two visual functions. Vision Research, 36, 2125-2140.
59. THEEUWES, J., & GODIJN, R. (2002). Irrelevant singletons capture attention: Evidence from inhibition of return. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 764-770.
60. THEEUWES, J., KRAMER, A. F., & ATCHLEY, P. (1998). Visual marking of old objects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 130-134.
61. TIPPER, S. P., JORDAN, H., & WEAVER, B. (1999). Scene-based and object-centered inhibition of return: Evidence for dual orienting mechanisms. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 50-60.
62. TIPPER, S. P., LORTIE, C., & BAYLIS, G. C. (1992). Selective reaching: Evidence for action-centered attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 891-905.
63. TIPPER, S. P., MEEGAN, D. V., & HOWARD, L. A. (2002). Action-centred negative priming: Evidence for reactive inhibition. Visual Cognition, 9, 591-614.
64. TIPPER, S. P., WEAVER, B., JERREAT, L. M., & BURAK, A. L. (1994). Objectbased and environment-based inhibition of return of visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 478-499.
65. TREISMAN, A. (1993). The perception of features and objects. In A. D. Baddeley & L. Weiskrantz (Eds.), Attention: Selection, awareness, and control. A tribute to Donald Broadbent (pp. 5-35). Oxford: Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press.
66. TREISMAN, A., & HAYES, A. (1998). Location and feature specificity in priming and automatized search. Unpublished manuscript.
67. TREISMAN, A., & SATO, S. (1990). Conjunction search revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 16, 459-478.
68. VAN SELST, M., & JOLICœUR, P. (1997). Decision and response in dual-task interference. Cognitive Psychology, 33, 266-307.
69. WATSON, D. G. (2001). Visual marking in moving displays: Featurebased inhibition is not necessary. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 74-84.
70. WATSON, D. G., & HUMPHREYS, G. W. (.1997). Visual marking: Prioritizing selection for new objects by top-down attentional inhibition of old objects. Psychological Review, 104, 90-122.
71. WATSON, D. G., & HUMPHREYS, G. W. (2000). Visual marking: Evidence for inhibition using a probe-dot detection paradigm. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 471-481.
72. WOLFE, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 202-238.
73. WOLFE, J. M. (1998a). Visual search. In H. Pashler (Ed.), Attention (pp. 13-73). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
74. WOLFE, J. M. (1998b). What can 1 million trials tell us about visual search? Psychological Science, 9, 33-39.
75. WOLFE, J. M. (1999). Inattentional amnesia. In V. Coltheart (Ed.), Fleetingmemories: Cognition of brief visual stimuli (pp. 71-94). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
76. WOLFE, J. M., KLEMPEN, N., & DAHLEN, K. (2000). Postattentive vision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 693-716.
77. WOODMAN, G. F., VOGEL, E. K., & LUCK, S. J. (2001). Visual search remains efficient when working memory is full. Psychological Science, 12, 219-224.
78. WRIGHT, R. D., & RICHARD, C. M. (1996). Inhibition of return at multiple locations in visual space. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50, 324-327.
79. YANTIS, S. (1993). Stimulus-driven attentional capture and attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 19, 676-681.
80. 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 & Performance, 23, 1783-1791.