Asia has the global advantage: Race and visual attention

Vision Research

Volumn 50, Issue 16, 2010, Pages 1540-1549

  McKone, Elinor ^a   Aimola Davies, Anne ^a,b   Fernando, Dinusha ^a   Aalders, Rachel ^a   Leung, Hildie ^a   Wickramariyaratne, Tushara ^a   Platow, Michael J ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Attention; Culture differences; Global local processing; Race differences

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASIA; ATTENTION; AUSTRALIA; CAUCASIAN; CHINA; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HONG KONG; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMMIGRANT; INDONESIA; INFORMATION PROCESSING; KOREA; MALAYSIA; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RACE DIFFERENCE; SINGAPORE; STIMULUS RESPONSE; VISUAL DISCRIMINATION; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ASIAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; ATTENTION; EUROPEAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 77954315392     PISSN: 00426989     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2010.05.010     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Blais C., Jack R.E., Scheepers C., Fiset D., Caldara R. Culture shapes how we look at faces. PLoS ONE 2008, 3:e3022.
2. Cameron J.E. A three-factor model of social identity. Self and Identity 2004, 3:239-262.
3. Chua H.F., Boland J.E., Nisbett R.E. Cultural variation in eye movements during scene perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2005, 102:12629-12633.
4. Davidoff J., Fonteneau E., Fagot J. Local and global processing: Observations from a remote culture. Cognition 2008, 108:702-709.
5. de Fockert J., Davidoff J., Fagot J., Parron C., Goldstein J. More accurate size contrast judgments in the Ebbinghaus illusion by a remote culture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2007, 33:738-742.
6. Doherty M., Tsuji H., Phillips W.A. The context sensitivity of visual size perception varies across cultures. Perception 2008, 37:1426-1433.
7. Evans K., Rotello C.M., Li X., Rayner K. Scene perception and memory revealed by eye movements and receiver-operating characteristic analyses: Does a cultural difference truly exist?. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2009, 62:276-285.
8. Fernald A., Morikawa H. Common themes and cultural variations in Japanese and American mothers' speech to infants. Child Development 1993, 64:637-656.
9. Green J., Morris R.D., Epstein C.M., West P.D., Engler H.F. Assessment of the relationship of cerebral hemisphere arousal asymmetry to perceptual asymmetry. Brain and Cognition 1992, 20:264-279.
10. Gutchess A.H., Welsh R.C., Boduroĝlu A., Park D.C. Cultural differences in neural function associated with object processing. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience 2006, 6:102-109.
11. Han S., Fan S., Chen L., Zhuo Y. Modulation of brain activities by hierarchical processing: A high-density ERP study. Brain Topography 1999, 11:171-183.
12. Han S., Northoff G. Culture-sensitive neural substrates of human cognition: A transcultural neuroimaging approach. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2008, 9:646-654.
13. Hedden T., Ketay S., Aron A., Markus H.R., Gabrieli J.D.E. Cultural influences on neural substrates of attentional control. Psychological Science 2008, 19:12-17.
14. Heinze H.J., Hinrichs H., Scholz M., Burchert W., Mangun G.R. Neural mechanisms of global and local processing: A combined PET and ERP study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1998, 10:485-498.
15. Hubner R. The effect of spatial frequency on global precedence and hemispheric differences. Perception and Psychophysics 1997, 59:187-201.
16. Jakobsson M., Scholz S.W., Scheet P., Gibbs J.R., VanLiere J.M., Fung H.-C., et al. Genotype, haplotype and copy-number variation in worldwide human populations. Nature 2008, 451:998-1003.
17. Ji L.-J., Peng K., Nisbett R.E. Culture, control, and perception of relationships in environment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2000, 78:943-955.
18. Kimchi R. Primacy of wholistic processing and global/local paradigm: A critical review. Psychological Bulletin 1992, 112:24-38.
19. Kimchi R., Amishav R., Sulitzeanu-Kenan A. Gender differences in global-local perception. Evidence from orientation and shape judgments. Acta Psychologica 2009, 130:64-71.
20. Kitayama S., Duffy S., Kawamura T., Larsen J.T. Perceiving an object and its context in different cultures: A cultural look at new look. Psychological Science 2003, 14:201-206.
21. Kramer J.H., Ellenberg L., Leonard J., Share L.J. Developmental sex differences in global-local perceptual bias. Neuropsychology 1996, 10:402-407.
22. Kühnen U., Oyserman D. Thinking about the self influences thinking in general: Cognitive consequences of salient self-concept. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2002, 38:492-499.
23. Li J.Z., Absher D.M., Tang H., Southwick A.M., Casto A.M., Ramachandran S., et al. Worldwide human relationships inferred from genome-wide patterns of variation. Science 2008, 319:1100-1104.
24. Liechty J., Pieters R., Wedel M. Global and local covert visual attention: Evidence from a Bayesian hidden Markov model. Psychometrika 2003, 68:519-541.
25. Lin Z., Han S. Self-construal priming modulates the scope of visual attention. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2009, 62:802-813.
26. Lin Z., Lin Y., Han S. Self-construal priming modulates visual activity underlying global/local perception. Biological Psychology 2008, 77:93-97.
27. Masuda T., Nisbett R.E. Attending holistically versus analytically: Comparing the context sensitivity of Japanese and Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2001, 81:922-934.
28. Masuda T., Nisbett R.E. Culture and change blindness. Cognitive Science 2006, 30:381-399.
29. Matsumoto D. Culture and self: An empirical assessment of Markus and Kitayama's theory of independent and interdependent self-construals. Asian Journal of Social Psychology 1999, 2:289-310.
30. McKone E., Aimola Davies A., Fernando D. Blurry means good focus: Myopia and visual attention. Perception 2008, 37:1765-1768.
31. Miyamoto Y., Nisbett R.E., Masuda T. Culture and the physical environment. Psychological Science 2006, 17:113-119.
32. Morgan I., Rose K. How genetic is school myopia?. Progress in Retinal and Eye Research 2005, 24:1-38.
33. Navon D. Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception. Cognitive Psychology 1977, 9:353-383.
34. Navon D. What does a compound letter tell the psychologist's mind?. Acta Psychologica 2003, 114:273-309.
35. Nisbett R.E., Miyamoto Y. The influence of culture: Holistic versus analytic perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2005, 9:467-473.
36. Nisbett R.E., Peng K., Choi I., Norenzayan A. Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review 2001, 108:291-310.
37. Norenzayan A., Smith E.E., Kim B.J., Nisbett R.E. Cultural preferences for formal versus intuitive reasoning. Cognitive Science 2002, 26:653-684.
38. Phillips W.A., Chapman K.L.S., Berry P.D. Size perception is less context-sensitive in males. Perception 2004, 33:79-86.
39. Poirel N., Pineau A., Jobard G., Mellet E. Seeing the forest before the trees depends on individual field dependency characteristics. Experimental Psychology 2008, 55:328-333.
40. Rayner K., Li X., Williams C.C., Cave K.R., Well A.D. Eye movements during information processing tasks: Individual differences and cultural effects. Vision Research 2007, 47:2714-2726.
41. Roalf D., Lowery N., Turetsky B.I. Behavioral and physiological findings of gender differences in global-local visual processing. Brain and Cognition 2006, 60:32-42.
42. Robertson L.C., Lamb M.R. Neuropsychological contributions to theories of part/whole organization. Cognitive Psychology 1991, 23:299-330.
43. Robertson L.C., Lamb M.R., Zaidel E. Interhemispheric relations in processing hierarchical patterns: Evidence from normal and commissurotomized subjects. Neuropsychology 1993, 7:325-342.
44. Rosenberg N.A., Pritchard J.K., Weber J.L., Cann H.M., Kidd K.K., Zhivotovsky L.A., et al. Genetic structure of human populations. Science 2002, 298:2381-2385.
45. Sergent J. The cerebral balance of power: Confrontation or cooperation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1982, 8:253-272.
46. Shih M., Pittinsky T.L., Ambady N. Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance. Psychological Science 1999, 10:80-82.
47. Singelis T.M. The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1994, 20:580-591.
48. Tardif T., Gelman S.A., Xu F. Putting the " noun bias" in context: A comparison of English and Mandarin. Child Development 1999, 70:620-635.
49. Turatto M., Facoetti A., Serra G., Benso F., Angi M., Umilta C., et al. Visuospatial attention in myopia. Cognitive Brain Research 1999, 8:369-372.
50. Van Kleeck M.H. Hemispheric differences in global versus local processing of hierarchical visual stimuli by normal subjects: New data and a meta-analysis of previous studies. Neuropsychologia 1989, 27:1165-1178.
51. Yamaguchi S., Yamagata S., Kobayashi S. Cerebral asymmetry of the " top-down" allocation of attention to global and local features. The Journal of Neuroscience 2000, 20:1-5.
52. Young A.W., Hellawell D., Hay D.C. Configurational information in face perception. Perception 1987, 16:747-759.
53. Yovel G., Yovel I., Levy J. Hemispheric asymmetries for global and local visual perception: Effects of stimulus and task factors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2001, 27:1369-1385.
54. Zhou J., Gotch C., Zhou Y., Liu Z. Perceiving an object in its context - Is the context cultural or perceptual?. Journal of Vision 2008, 8:1-5.