Signal detection evidence for limited capacity in visual search

Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

Volumn 73, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 2413-2424

  Palmer, Evan M ^a   Fencsik, David E ^b   Flusberg, Stephen J ^c   Horowitz, Todd S ^d,e   Wolfe, Jeremy M ^d,e  

^a WICHITA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

Signal detection theory; Theoretical and computational attention models; Visual search

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION;

ADULT; ATTENTION; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; SIGNAL DETECTION, PSYCHOLOGICAL;

EID: 81755161436     PISSN: 19433921     EISSN: 1943393X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-011-0199-2     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Baldassi, S., & Burr, D. C. (2000). Feature-based integration of orientation signals in visual search. Vision Research, 40, 1293-1300. doi: 10. 1016/S0042-6989(00)00029-8.
2. Baldassi, S., & Verghese, P. (2002). Comparing integration rules in visual search. Journal of Vision, 2(8), 3: 559-570. doi: 10. 1167/2. 8. 3.
3. Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433-436. doi: 10. 1163/156856897X00357.
4. Bricolo, E., Gianesini, T., Fanini, A., Bundesen, C., & Chelazzi, L. (2002). Serial attention mechanisms in visual search: A direct behavioral demonstration. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 980-993. doi: 10. 1162/089892902320474454.
5. Broadbent, D. (1958). Perception and communication. New York: Oxford University Press.
6. Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2002). Model selection and multimodel inference: A practical information-theoretic approach (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.
7. Cameron, E. L., Tai, J. C., Eckstein, M. P., & Carrasco, M. (2004). Signal detection theory applied to three visual search tasks-identification, yes/no detection and localization. Spatial Vision, 17, 295-325. doi: 10. 1163/1568568041920212.
8. Carrasco, M., & McElree, B. (2001). Covert attention accelerates the rate of visual information processing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98, 5363-5367. doi: 10. 1073/pnas. 081074098.
9. Chan, L. K. H., & Hayward, W. G. (2009). Feature integration theory revisited: Dissociating feature detection and attentional guidance in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 35, 119-132. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 35. 1. 119.
10. Cousineau, D. (2005). Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson's method. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 1, 42-45.
11. Davis, E. T., Shikano, T., Main, K., Hailston, K., Michel, R. K., & Sathian, K. (2006). Mirror-image symmetry and search asymmetry: A comparison of their effects on visual search and a possible unifying explanation. Vision Research, 46, 1263-1281. doi: 10. 1016/j. visres. 2005. 10. 032.
12. Dosher, B. A., Han, S., & Lu, Z.-L. (2004). Parallel processing in visual search asymmetry. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 30, 3-27. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 30. 1. 3.
13. Dosher, B. A., Han, S., & Lu, Z.-L. (2010). Information-limited parallel processing in difficult heterogeneous covert visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1128-1144. doi: 10. 1037/a0020366.
14. Dukewich, K. R., & Klein, R. M. (2005). Implications of search accuracy for serial self-terminating models of search. Visual Cognition, 12, 1386-1403. doi: 10. 1080/13506280444000788.
15. Eckstein, M. P. (1998). The lower visual search efficiency for conjunctions is due to noise and not serial attentional processing. Psychological Science, 9, 111-118. doi: 10. 1111/1467-9280. 00020.
16. Eckstein, M. P., Thomas, J. P., Palmer, J., & Shimozaki, S. S. (2000). A signal detection model predicts the effects of set size on visual search accuracy for feature, conjunction, triple conjunction, and disjunction displays. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 425-451. doi: 10. 3758/BF03212096.
17. Gilden, D. L., Thornton, T. L., & Marusich, L. R. (2010). The serial process in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 36, 533-542. doi: 10. 1037/a0016464.
18. Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
19. Kaernbach, C. (1991). Simple adaptive testing with the weighted up-down method. Perception & Psychophysics, 49, 227-229. doi: 10. 3758/BF03214307.
20. Kinchla, R. A. (1974). Detecting target elements in multielement arrays: A confusability model. Perception & Psychophysics, 15, 149-158. doi: 10. 3758/BF03205843.
21. Klein, R. (1988). Inhibitory tagging system facilitates visual search. Nature, 334, 430-431. doi: 10. 1038/334430a0.
22. Kwak, H. W., Dagenbach, D., & Egeth, H. (1991). Further evidence for a time-independent shift of the focus of attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 49, 473-480.
23. Levi, D. M. (2008). Crowding-An essential bottleneck for object recognition: A mini-review. Vision Research, 48, 635-654. doi: 10. 1016/j. visres. 2007. 12. 009.
24. Luck, S. J., & Hillyard, S. A. (1990). Electrophysiological evidence for parallel and serial processing during visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 48, 603-617.
25. 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 and Performance, 25, 1517-1539. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 25. 6. 1517.
26. Morey, R. (2008). Confidence intervals from normalized data: A correction to Cousineau (2005). Tutorial in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 4, 61-64.
27. Morgan, M. J., & Solomon, J. A. (2006). Attentional capacity limit for visual search causes spatial neglect in normal observers. Vision Research, 46, 1868-1875. doi: 10. 1016/j. visres. 2005. 11. 026.
28. Palmer, J. (1994). Set-size effects in visual search-The effect of attention is independent of the stimulus for simple tasks. Vision Research, 34, 1703-1721.
29. Palmer, J. (1995). Attention in visual search: Distinguishing four causes of a set-size effect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4, 118-123. doi: 10. 1111/1467-8721. ep10772534.
30. Palmer, J., Ames, C. T., & Lindsey, D. T. (1993). Measuring the effect of attention on simple visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 19, 108-130. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 19. 1. 108.
31. Palmer, J., & McLean, J. (1995). Imperfect, unlimited-capacity, parallel search yields large set-size effects. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Mathematical Psychology, Irvine, California.
32. Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437-442. doi: 10. 1163/156856897X00366.
33. Põder, E. (1999). Search for feature and for relative position: Measurement of capacity limitations. Vision Research, 39, 1321-1327. doi: 10. 1016/S0042-6989(98)00253-3.
34. Shaw, M. L. (1980). Identifying attentional and decision-making components in information processing. In R. S. Nickerson (Ed.), Attention and performance VIII (pp. 277-296). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
35. Shaw, M. L. (1984). Division of attention among spatial locations: A fundamental difference between detection of letters and detection of luminance increments. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X: Control of language processes (pp. 109-121). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
36. Townsend, J. T. (1990). Serial vs. parallel processing: Sometimes they look like Tweedledum and Tweedledee but they can (and should) be distinguished. Psychological Science, 1, 46-54. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-9280. 1990. tb00067. x.
37. Townsend, J. T., & Wenger, M. J. (2004). The serial-parallel dilemma: A case study in a linkage of theory and method. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 391-418.
38. Treisman, A. M., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136. doi: 10. 1016/0010-0285(80)90005-5.
39. Verghese, P. (2001). Visual search and attention: A signal detection theory approach. Neuron, 31, 523-535.
40. Verghese, P., & Nakayama, K. (1994). Stimulus discriminability in visual search. Vision Research, 34, 2453-2467. doi: 10. 1016/0042-6989(94)90289-5.
41. Wickens, T. (2002). Elementary signal detection theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
42. Wolfe, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2. 0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 202-238. doi: 10. 3758/BF03200774.
43. Wolfe, J. M. (2007). Guided Search 4. 0: Current progress with a model of visual search. In W. D. Gray (Ed.), Integrated models of cognitive systems (pp. 99-119). New York: Oxford University Press.
44. Wolfe, J. M., & Bennett, S. C. (1997). Preattentive object files: Shapeless bundles of basic features. Vision Research, 37, 25-43. doi: 10. 1016/S0042-6989(96)00111-3.
45. Wolfe, J. M., Cave, K. R., & Franzel, S. L. (1989). Guided search: An alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 15, 419-433. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 15. 3. 419.
46. Wolfe, J. M., & Horowitz, T. S. (2004). What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, 495-501. doi: 10. 1038/nrn1411.