Amodal completion in visual search: Preemption or context effects?

Psychological Science

Volumn 15, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 351-355

  Rauschenberger, Robert ^a,d   Peterson, Mary A ^a   Mosca, Fauzia ^b,c   Bruno, Nicola ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TRIESTE   (Italy)

^d University of Arizona   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AFFECT; ARTICLE; HUMAN; REACTION TIME; VISION;

AFFECT; HUMANS; REACTION TIME; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 2542573254     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00682.x     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Banks, W.P., & Prinzmetal, W. (1976). Configurational effects in visual information processing. Perception & Psychophysics, 19, 361-367.
2. Bruno, N., Bertamini, M., & Domini, F. (1997). Amodal completion of partly occluded surfaces: Is there a mosaic stage? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 1412-1426.
3. Bruno, N., & Gerbino, W. (1987). Amodal completion and illusory figures: An information processing analysis. In S. Petry & G. Meyer (Eds.), The perception of illusory figures (pp. 220-223). New York: Springer Verlag.
4. Chun, M.M., & Jiang, Y. (1998). Contextual cueing: Implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention. Cognitive Psychology, 36, 28-71.
5. Gerbino, W. (1989). Form categorization and amodal completion. Acta Psychologica, 72, 295-300.
6. Gerbino, W., & Salmaso, D. (1987). The effect of amodal completion on visual matching. Acta Psychologica, 65, 25-46.
7. Guttman, S., Sekuler, A.B., & Kellman, P.J. (2003). Temporal variations in visual completion: A reflection of spatial limits? Manuscript submitted for publication.
8. Humphreys, G.W., & Müller, H. (2000). A search asymmetry reversed by figure-ground assignment. Psychological Science, 11, 196-201.
9. Joseph, J.S., & Nakayama, K. (1999). Amodal representation depends on the object seen before partial occlusion. Vision Research, 39, 283-292.
10. Peterson, M.A., & Hochberg, J. (1983). Opposed-set measurement procedure: A quantitative analysis of the role of local cues and intention in form perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 183-193.
11. Pomerantz, J., Seger, L., & Stoever, R. (1977). Perception of wholes and of their component parts: Some configural superiority effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 422-435.
12. Rauschenberger, R., & Yantis, S. (2001). Masking unveils pre-amodal completion representation in visual search. Nature, 410, 369-372.
13. Rauschenberger, R., & Yantis, S. (2003). Perceptual encoding efficiency in visual search. Manuscript submitted for publication.
14. Rensink, R.A., & Enns, J.T. (1998). Early completion of occluded objects. Vision Research, 28, 169-184.
15. Sekuler, A.B. (1994). Local and global minima in visual completion: Effects of symmetry and orientation. Perception, 23, 529-545.
16. Sekuler, A.B., & Palmer, S.E. (1992). Perception of partly occluded objects: A microgenetic analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 95-111.
17. van Lier, R.J., Leeuwenberg, E.L., & van der Helm, P.A. (1995). Multiple completions primed by occlusion patterns. Perception, 24, 727-740.
18. Zemel, R.S., Behrmann, M., Mozer, M.C., & Bavelier, D. (2002). Experience-dependent perceptual grouping and object-based attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 202-217.