Rapid resumption of interrupted visual search new insights on the interaction between vision and memory

Psychological Science

Volumn 16, Issue 9, 2005, Pages 684-688

  Lieras, Alejandro ^a   Rensink, Ronald A ^b   Enns, James T ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HUMAN; MEMORY; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; REVIEW; SHORT TERM MEMORY; VISION;

HUMANS; MEMORY; MEMORY, SHORT-TERM; REACTION TIME; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 25144493118     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01596.x     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Chun, M.M., & Jiang, Y. (1998). Contextual cueing: Implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention. Cognitive Psychology, 36, 28-71.
2. Chun, M.M., & Jiang, Y. (2003). Implicit, long-term spatial contextual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology; Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 224-234.
3. Chun, M.M., & Nakayama, K. (2000). On the functional role of implicit visual memory for the adaptive deployment of attention across scenes. Visual Cognition, 7, 65-81.
4. Di Lollo, V., Enns, J.T., & Rensink, R.A. (2000). Competition for consciousness among visual events: The psychophysics of reentrant visual processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 481-507.
5. Enns, J.T., & Di Lollo, V. (2000). What's new in visual masking? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 345-352.
6. Enns, J.T., & Rensink, R.A. (1992). VScope™: Vision testing software for the Macintosh. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: Micropsych Software.
7. Horowitz, T.S., & Wolfe, J.M. (1998). Visual search has no memory. Nature, 394, 575-577.
8. Horowitz, T.S., & Wolfe, J.M. (2001). Search for multiple targets: Remember the targets, forget the search. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 272-285.
9. Horowitz, T.S., & Wolfe, J.M. (2003). Memory for rejected distractors in visual search? Visual Cognition, 10, 257-298.
10. Lieras, A., & Enns, J.T. (2004). Negative compatibility or object updating? A cautionary tale of mask-dependent priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 475-493.
11. Lieras, A., & Moore, C.M. (2003). When the target becomes the mask: Using apparent motion to isolate the object-level component of object substitution masking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 106-120.
12. McCarley, J.S., Wang, R.F., Kramer, A.F., Irwin, D.E., & Peterson, M.S. (2003). How much memory does oculomotor search have? Psychological Science, 14, 422-426.
13. Oh, S.H., & Kim, M.S. (2004). The role of spatial working memory in visual search efficiency. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 275-281.
14. 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.
15. Rensink, R. A. (2000). Visual search for change: A probe into the nature of attentional processing. Visual Cognition, 7, 345-376.
16. Wolfe, J.M. (1998). What can 1 million trials tell us about visual search? Psychological Science, 9, 33-39.
17. Woodman, G.F., Vogel, E.K., & Luck, S.J. (2001). Visual search remains efficient when visual working memory is full. Psychological Science, 12, 219-224.