Studying visual search using systems factorial methodology with target-distractor similarity as the factor

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 70, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 583-603

  Fifić, Mario ^a   Townsend, James T ^a   Eidels, Ami ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COGNITION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; SHORT TERM MEMORY; VISION;

ADULT; ATTENTION; COGNITION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MEMORY, SHORT-TERM; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 48049112418     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/PP.70.4.583     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. ASHBY, F. G., & TOWNSEND, J. T. (1980). Decomposing the reaction time distribution: Pure insertion and selective influence revisited. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 21, 93-123.
2. ASHBY, F. G., & TOWNSEND, J. T. (1986). Varieties of perceptual independence. Psychological Review, 93, 154-179.
3. ATKINSON, R. C., HOLMGREN, J. E., & JUOLA, J. F. (1969). Processing time as influenced by the number of elements in a visual display. Perception & Psychophysics, 6, 321-326.
4. BACON, W. F, & EGETH, H. E. (1994). Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture. Perception & Psychophysics, 55, 485-496.
5. BUNDESEN, C. (1990). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97, 523-547.
6. COLONIUS, H., & TOWNSEND, J. T. (1997). Activation-state representation of models for the redundant-signals-effect. In A. A. J. Marley (Ed.), Choice, decision, and measurement (pp. 245-254). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. COUSINEAU, D., & SHIFFRIN, R. M. (2004). Termination of a visual search with large display size effects. Spatial Vision, 17, 327-352.
8. DIEDERICH, A., & COLONIUS, H. (1991). A further test of the superposition model for the redundant-signals effect in biomodal detection. Perception & Psychophysics, 50, 83-86.
9. DUNCAN, J., & HUMPHREYS, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433-458.
10. DZHAFAROV, E. N. (1997). Process representations and decompositions of response times. In A. A. J. Marley (Ed.), Choice, decision, and measurement (pp. 255-278). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. DZHAFAROV, E. N. (1999). Conditionally selective dependence of random variables on external factors. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 43, 123-157.
12. EGETH, H. E. (1966). Parallel versus serial processes in multidimensional stimulus discrimination. Perception & Psychophysics, 1, 245-252.
13. EGETH, H. E., & DAGENBACH, D. (1991). Parallel versus serial processing in visual search: Further evidence from subadditive effects of a visual quality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 17, 550-559.
14. FIFIĆ, M., (2006) Emerging holistic properties at face value: Assessing characteristics of face perception. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
15. FOLK, C. L., & REMINGTON, R. (1998). Selectivity in distraction by irrelevant featural singletons: Evidence for two forms of attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 847-858.
16. GROSSBERG, S., MINGOLLA, E., & ROSS, W. D. (1994). A neural theory of attentive visual search: Interactions of boundary, surface, spatial, and object representations. Psychological Review, 101, 470-489.
17. HUGHES, H. C., & TOWNSEND, J. T. (1998). Varieties of binocular interaction in human vision. Psychological Science, 9, 53-60.
18. INNES-KER, A. H. K. (2003). Gestalt perception of emotional expressions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
19. 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.
20. MILLER, J. (1982). Divided attention: Evidence for coactivation with redundant signals. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 247-279.
21. MORDKOFF, J. T., & YANTIS, S. (1991). An interactive race model of divided attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Perfomance, 17, 520-538.
22. PALMER, J., VERGHESE, P., & PAVEL, M. (2000). The psychophysics of visual search. Vision Research, 40, 1227-1268.
23. PASHLER, H., & HARRIS, C. R. (2001). Spontaneous allocation of visual attention: Dominant role of uniqueness. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 747-752.
24. SAGI, D., & JULESZ, B. (1985). "Where" and "what" in vision. Science, 228, 1217-1219.
25. SCHWEICKERT, R. (1978). A critical path generalization of the additive factor method: Analysis of a Stroop task. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 18, 105-139.
26. SCHWEICKERT, R., GIORGINI, M., & DZHAFAROV, E. (2000). Selective influence and response time cumulative distribution functions in serial-parallel task networks. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 44, 504-535.
27. SCHWEICKERT, R., & TOWNSEND, J. T. (1989). A trichotomy: Interactions of factors prolonging sequential and concurrent mental processes in stochastic discrete mental (PERT) networks. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 33, 328-347.
28. SMITH, P. L., &VAN ZANDT, T. (2000). Time-dependent Poisson counter models of response latency in simple judgment. British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology, 53, 293-315.
29. STERNBERG, S. (1966). High-speed scanning in human memory. Science, 153, 652-654.
30. STERNBERG, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. Acta Psychologica, 30, 276-315.
31. THORNTON, T. L., & GILDEN, D. L. (2007). Parallel and serial processes in visual search. Psychological Review, 114, 71-103.
32. TOWNSEND, J. T. (1969). Mock parallel and serial models and experimental detection of these. In Proceedings of the Purdue Centennial Symposium on Information Processing (pp. 617-628). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
33. TOWNSEND, J. T. (1971). A note on the identifiability of parallel and serial processes. Perception & Psychophysics, 10, 161-163.
34. TOWNSEND, J. T. (1972). Some results concerning the identifiability of parallel and serial processes. British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology, 25, 168-199.
35. TOWNSEND, J. T. (1984). Uncovering mental processes with factorial experiments. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 28, 363-400.
36. TOWNSEND, J. T. (1990). Truth and consequences of ordinal differences in statistical distributions: Toward a theory of hierarchical inference. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 551-567.
37. TOWNSEND, J. T., &ASHBY, F. G. (1978). Methods of modeling capacity in simple processing systems. In J. Castellan & F. Restle (Eds.), Cognitive theory (Vol. III, pp. 200-239). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
38. TOWNSEND, J. T., & ASHBY, F. G. (1983). The stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. TOWNSEND, J. T., & FIFIĆ, M. (2004). Parallel versus serial processing and individual differences in high-speed search in human memory. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 953-962.
40. TOWNSEND, J. T., & NOZAWA, G. (1988, November). Strong evidence for parallel processing with simple dot stimuli. Paper presented at the 29th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Chicago.
41. TOWNSEND, J. T, & NOZAWA, G. (1995). Spatiotemporal properties of elementary perception: An investigation of parallel, serial, and coactive theories. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 39, 321-359.
42. TOWNSEND, J. T., & ROOS, R. N. (1973). Search reaction time for single targets in multiletter stimuli with brief visual displays. Memory & Cognition, 1, 319-332.
43. TOWNSEND, J. T, & THOMAS, R. D. (1994). Stochastic dependencies in parallel and serial models: Effects on systems factorial interactions. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 38, 1-34.
44. TOWNSEND, J. T., & WENGER, M. J. (2004a). The serial-parallel dilemma: A case study in a linkage of theory and method. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 391-418.
45. TOWNSEND, J. T, & WENGER, M. J. (2004b). A theory of interactive parallel processing: New capacity measures and predictions for a response time inequality series. Psychological Review, 111, 1003-1035.
46. TREISMAN, A., & GELADE, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136.
47. TREISMAN, A., & SATO, S. (1990). Conjunction search revised. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 16, 459-478.
48. WENGER, M. J., & TOWNSEND, J. T. (2001). Faces as gestalt stimuli: Process characteristics. In M. J. Wenger & J. T. Townsend (Eds.), Computational, geometric, and process perspectives on facial cognition: Contexts and challenges (pp. 229-284). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
49. WENGER, M. J., & TOWNSEND, J. T. (2006). On the costs and benefits of faces and words: Process characteristics of feature search in highly meaningful stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 32, 755-779.
50. WOLFE, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 202-238.
51. WOLFE, J. M. (1998). What can 1 million trials tell us about visual search? Psychological Science, 9, 33-39.
52. WOLFE, J. M., CAVE, K. R., & FRANZEL, S. L. (1989). Guided search: An alternative to the modified feature integration model for visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 15, 419-433.
53. ZELINSKY, G. J., & SHEINBERG, D. L. (1997). Eye movements during parallel-serial visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 23, 244-262.