The specificity of the search template

Journal of Vision

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2009, Pages

  Bravo, Mary J ^a,c   Farid, Hany ^b  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Dartmouth Department of Computer Science_Dartmouth College   (United States)

^c NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Attention; Object recognition; Visual search

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; VISION;

ATTENTION; CUES; HUMANS; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 58849099190     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15347362     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/9.1.34     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Blough, D. S. (2002). Measuring the search image: Expectation, detection, and recognition in pigeon visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 28, 397-405.
2. Bond, A. B., & Kamil, A. C. (2002). Visual predators select for crypticity and polymorphism in virtual prey. Nature, 415, 609-613.
3. Bourke, P. A., & Duncan, J. (2005). Effect of template complexity on visual search and dual-task performance. Psychological Science, 16, 208-213.
4. Brainard, D. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433-436.
5. Bundesen, C. (1990). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97, 523-547.
6. Chelazzi, L., Duncan, J., Miller, E. K., & Desimone, R. (1998). Responses of neurons in inferior temporal cortex during memory-guided visual search. Journal of Neurophysiology, 80, 2918-2940.
7. Chelazzi, L., Miller, E. K., Duncan, J., & Desimone, R. (1993). A neural basis for visual search in inferior temporal cortex. Nature, 363, 345-347.
8. Corbetta, M., & Shulman, G. L. (2002). Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain. Nature Reviews, Neuroscience, 3, 201-215.
9. Desimone, R., & Duncan, J. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 18, 193-222.
10. Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433-458.
11. Hamker, F. H. (2005). The reentry hypothesis: The putative interaction of the frontal eye field, ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, and areas V4, IT for attention and eye movement. Cerebral Cortex, 15, 431-447.
12. Kristjánsson, A., Wang, D., & Nakayama, K. (2002). The role of priming in conjunctive visual search. Cognition, 85, 37-52.
13. Malinowski, P., & Hübner, R. (2001). The effect of familiarity on visual-search performance: Evidence for learned basic features. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 458-463.
14. Maljkovic, V., & Nakayama, K. (1994). Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features. Memory & Cognition, 22, 657-672.
15. Mruczek, R. E., & Sheinberg, D. L. (2005). Distractor familiarity leads to more efficient visual search for complex stimuli. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 1016-1031.
16. Najemnik, J., & Geisler, W. S. (2005). Optimal eye movement strategies in visual search. Nature, 434, 387-391.
17. Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437-442.
18. Rajashekar, U., Cormack, L. K., & Bovik, A. C. (2004). Point of gaze analysis reveals visual search strategies. Human Vision and Electronic Imaging IX, 5292, 296-306.
19. Rao, R. P., Zelinsky, G. J., Hayhoe, M. M., & Ballard, D. H. (2002). Eye movements in iconic visual search. Vision Research, 42, 1447-1463.
20. Serences, J. T., & Boynton, G. M. (2007). Feature-based attentional modulations in the absence of direct visual stimulation. Neuron, 55, 301-312.
21. Shen, J., & Reingold, E. M. (2001). Visual search asymmetry: The influence of stimulus familiarity and low-level features. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 464-475.
22. Stevens, M., Cuthill, I. C., Windsor, A. M., & Walker, H. J. (2006). Disruptive contrast in animal camouflage. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 273, 2433-2438.
23. Tinbergen, N. (1960). The natural control of insects in pine woods: I. Factors influencing the intensity of predation by songbirds. Archives Neelandaises de Zoologie, 13, 265-343.
24. Usher, M., & Niebur, E. (1996). Modeling the temporal dynamics of IT neurons in visual search: A mechanism for top-down selective attention. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 311-327.
25. Vickery, T. J., King, L. W., & Jiang, Y. (2005). Setting up the target template in visual search. Journal of Vision, 5(1):8, 81-92, http://journalofvision.org/5/1/8/, doi:10.1167/5.1.8.
26. Wang, Q., Cavanagh, P., & Green, M. (1994). Familiarity and pop-out in visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 56, 495-500.
27. Wiggs, C. L., & Martin, A. (1998). Properties and mechanisms of perceptual priming. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 8, 227-233.
28. Wolfe, J. M. (2007). Guided Search 4.0: Current progress with a model of visual search. In W. Gray (Ed.), Integrated models of cognitive systems (pp. 90-119). New York: Oxford.
29. Wolfe, J. M., Horowitz, T. S., Kenner, N., Hyle, M., & Vasan, N. (2004). How fast can you change your mind? The speed of top-down guidance in visual search. Vision Research, 44, 1411-1426.
30. Zelinsky, G. J., Rao, R., Hayhoe, M., & Ballard, D. (1997). Eye movements reveal the spatio-temporal dynamics of visual search. Psychological Science, 8, 448-453.