Lower visual field advantage for motion segmentation during high competition for selection

Spatial Vision

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 447-460

  Lakha, Louise ^a   Humphreys, Glyn ^b  

^a BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Dorsal stream; Enumeration; Motion segmentation; Subitization; Visual attention; Visual field

Indexed keywords

IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE CODING; MOTION ESTIMATION; VISION;

DORSAL STREAM; ENUMERATION; MOTION SEGMENTATION; SUBITIZATION; VISUAL ATTENTION; VISUAL FIELDS;

IMAGE SEGMENTATION;

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HUMAN; MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; VISUAL CORTEX; VISUAL FIELD;

ATTENTION; HUMANS; MOTION PERCEPTION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; VISUAL CORTEX; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 24944458622     PISSN: 01691015     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/1568568054389570     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Albright, T. D. (1989). Centrifugal directional bias in the middle temporal visual area (MT) of the macaque, Vis. Neurosci. 2, 177-188.
2. Alston, L. and Humphreys, G. W. (2004). Subitization and attentional engagement by transient stimuli, Spatial Vision 17, 17-50.
3. Bundesen, C. (1990). A theory of visual attention, Psychol. Rev. 97, 523-547.
4. Bundesen, C. (1996). Formal models of visual attention: A tutorial review, in: Converging Operations in the Study of Visual Selective Attention, Kramer, A. F., Coles, M. G. H. and Logan, G. D. (Eds), pp. 1-43. American Psychological Association, London.
5. Bundesen, C. (1998). Visual selective attention: Outlines of a choice model, a race model and a computational theory, Visual Cognition 5, 287-309.
6. Carrasco, M., Talgar, C. P. and Cameron, E. L. (2001). Characterizing visual performance fields: effects of transient covert attention, spatial frequency, eccentricity, task and set size, Spatial Vision 15, 61-75.
7. DeYoe, E. A. and Van Essen, D. C. (1988). Concurrent processing streams in monkey visual cortex, Trends in Neurosciences 11, 219-226.
8. Dumoulin, S. O., Baker, C. L. and Hess, R. F. (2001). Centrifugal bias for second-order but not first-order motion, JOSA A 18, 2179-2189.
9. Duncan, J. and Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity, Psychol. Rev. 96, 433-458.
10. Duncan, J. and Humphreys, G. W. (1992). Beyond the search surface: visual search and attentional engagement, J. Exper. Psychol: Human Perception and Performance 18, 578-588.
11. Duncan, J., Bundesen, C., Olson, A., Humphreys, G. W., Chavda, S. and Shibuya, H. (1999). Systematic analysis of deficits in visual attention, J. Exper. Psychol: General 128, 1-29.
12. Edwards, M. and Badcock, D. R. (1993). Asymmetries in the sensitivity to motion in depth: A centripetal bias, Perception 22, 1013-1023.
13. Ellison, A. and Walsh, V. (2000). Visual field asymmetries in attention and learning, Spatial Vision 14, 3-9.
14. Fecteau, J. H., Enns, J. T. and Kingstone, A. (2000). Competition-induced visual field differences in search, Psychol. Sci. 11, 386-393.
15. Frick, R. (1987). The homogeneity effect in counting, Perception and Psychophysics 41, 8-16.
16. Gazzaniga, M. S. and Ladavas, E. (1987). Disturbances in spatial attention following lesion or disconnection of the right parietal lobe, in: Neurophysiological and Neuropsychological Aspects of Spatial Neglect, Jeannerod, M. (Ed.), pp. 203-213. North-Holland, Amsterdam.
17. Georgeson, M. A. and Harris, M. G. (1978). Apparent foveo-fugal drift of counterphase gratings, Perception 7, 527-536.
18. He, S., Cavanagh, P. and Intriligator, J. (1996). Attentional resolution and the locus of visual awareness, Nature 383, 334-337.
19. Kaufman, E., Lord, M., Reese, T. and Volkman, J. (1949). The discrimination of visual number, Amer. J. Psychol. 62, 498-525.
20. Klahr, D. (1973). Quantification processes, in: Visual Information Processing, Proceedings of the Symposium on Cognition, 8th, Carnegie-Mellon University (1972). Academic Press, London.
21. Livingstone, M. and Hubel, D. (1988). Segregation of form, color, movement and depth: Anatomy, physiology, and perception, Science 240, 740-749.
22. Mandler, G. and Shebo, B. (1982). Subitizing: An analysis of its component processes, J. Exper. Psychol.: General 111, 1-22.
23. Mateeff, S., Yakimoff, N., Hohnsbein, J., Ehrenstein, W. H., Bohdanecky, Z. and Radil, T. (1991). Selective directional sensitivity in visual motion perception, Vision Research 31, 131-138.
24. McLeod, P., Driver, J., Dienes, Z. and Crisp, J. (1991). Filtering by movement in visual search, J. Exper. Psychol.: Human Perception and Performance 17, 55-64.
25. Milner, A. D. and Goodale, M. A. (1995). The Visual Brain in Action. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
26. Murakami, I. and Shimojo, S. (1993). Motion capture changes to induced motion at higher luminance contrasts, smaller eccentricities, and larger inducer sizes, Vision Research 33, 2091-2107.
27. Previc, F. H. (1990). Functional specialization in the lower and upper visual fields in humans: its ecological origins and neurophysiological implications, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13, 519-575.
28. Previc, F. H. (1996). Attentional and oculomotor influences on visual field anisotropies in visual search performance, Visual Cognition 3, 277-301.
29. Previc, F. H. and Naegele, P. D. (2001). Target-tilt and vertical-hemifield asymmetries in free-scan search for 3-D targets, Perception and Psychophysics 63, 445-457.
30. Pylyshyn, Z. (1989). The role of location indexes in spatial perception. A sketch of the FINST spatial-index model, Cognition 32, 65-97.
31. Pylyshyn, Z. (1994). Some primitive mechanisms of spatial attention, Cognition 50, 363-384.
32. Raymond, J. E. (1993). Directional anisotropy of motion sensitivity across the visual field, Vision Research 34, 1029-1037.
33. Raymond, J. E. and Hill, G. T. (2001). Vertical hemifield effects are different for global versus local motion, in: ECVP 2001.
34. Rezec, A. A. and Dobkins, K. R. (2004). Attentional weighting: A possible account of visual field asymmetries in visual search? Spatial Vision (in press).
35. Riddoch, M. J. and Humphreys, G. W. (1987). Perceptual and action systems in unilateral neglect, in: Neurophysiological and Neuropsychological Aspects of Spatial Neglect, Jeannerod, M. (Ed.), pp. 151-181. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam.
36. Robertson, L., Treisman, A., Friedman-Hill, S. and Grabowecky, M. (1997). The interaction of spatial and object pathways: Evidence from Balint's Syndrome, J. Cognit. Neurosci. 9, 295-317.
37. Sagi, D. and Julesz, B. (1984). Detection versus discrimination of visual orientation, Perception 13, 619-628.
38. Talgar, C. P. and Carrasco, M. (2002). Vertical meridian asymmetry in spatial resolution: Visual and attentional factors, Psychonomic Bull. Rev. 9, 714-722.
39. Trick, L. M. and Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1993). What enumeration studies can show us about visual attention: Evidence for limited capacity preattentive processing, J. Exper. Psychol: Human Perception and Performance 19, 331-351.
40. Trick, L. M. and Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1994). Why are small and large numbers enumerated differently? A limited capacity preattentive stage in vision, Psychol. Rev. 101, 80-102.
41. Ungerleider, L. G. and Mishkin, M. (1982). Two cortical visual systems, in: Analysis of Visual Behaviour, Ingle, D. J., Goodale, M. A. and Mansfield, R. J. W. (Eds), pp. 549-586. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
42. Von Grunau, M. and Dube, S. (1994). Visual-search asymmetry for viewing direction, Perception and Psychophysics 56, 211-220.
43. Watson, D. G. and Humphreys, G. W. (1999). The magic number four and temporo-parietal damage: Neuropsychological impairments in counting targets amongst distractors, Cognitive Neuropsychology 16, 609-629.
44. Watson, D. G., Maylor, E. M. and Manson, N. J. (2002). Aging and enumeration: A selective deficit for the subitization of targets among distractors, Psychology and Aging 17, 496-504.