Is the whole really more than the sum of its parts? Estimates of average size and orientation are susceptible to object substitution masking

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 233-244

  Jacoby, Oscar ^a   Kamke, Marc R ^a   Mattingley, Jason B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Ensemble coding; Mean size judgment; Object substitution masking; Recurrent processing; Statistical processing

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; ORIENTATION; PERCEPTION; PHOTOSTIMULATION;

HUMANS; JUDGMENT; ORIENTATION; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; PHOTIC STIMULATION; SIZE PERCEPTION;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84880485345     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0028762     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Alvarez, G. A., & Franconeri, S. L. (2007). How many objects can you track?: Evidence for a resource-limited attentive tracking mechanism. Journal of Vision, 7, 14.1-10. doi:10.1167/7.13.14
2. Alvarez, G. A., & Oliva, A. (2008). The representation of simple ensemble visual features outside the focus of attention. Psychological Science, 19, 392-398. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02098.x
3. Alvarez, G. A., & Oliva, A. (2009). Spatial ensemble statistics are efficient codes that can be represented with reduced attention. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106, 7345-7350. doi:10.1073/pnas.0808981106
4. Alvarez, G. A. (2011). Representing multiple objects as an ensemble enhances visual cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 122-131. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2011.01.003
5. Ariely, D. (2001). Seeing sets: Representation by statistical properties. Psychological Science, 12, 157-162. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00327
6. Atchley, P., & Andersen, G. J. (1995). Discrimination of speed distributions: Sensitivity to statistical properties. Vision Research, 35, 3131-3144. doi:10.1016/0042-6989(95)00057-7
7. Balas, B., Nakano, L., & Rosenholtz, R. (2009). A summary-statistic representation in peripheral vision explains visual crowding. Journal of Vision, 9, 13.1-18. doi:10.1167/9.12.13
8. Bauer, B. (2009). The danger of trial-by-trial knowledge of results in perceptual averaging studies. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71, 655-665. doi:10.3758/APP.71.3.655
9. Bouvier, S., & Treisman, A. (2010). Visual feature binding requires reentry. Psychological Science, 21, 200-204. doi:10.1177/0956797609357858
10. Brady, T. F., & Alvarez, G. A. (2011). Hierarchical encoding in visual working memory: Ensemble statistics bias memory for individual items. Psychological Science, 22, 384-392. doi:10.1177/0956797610397956
11. Bulakowski, P. F., Post, R. B., & Whitney, D. (2011). Reexamining the possible benefits of visual crowding: Dissociating crowding from ensemble percepts. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73, 1003-1009. doi:10.3758/s13414-010-0086-2
12. Chakravarthi, R., & Cavanagh, P. (2009). Recovery of a crowded object by masking the flankers: Determining the locus of feature integration. Journal of Vision, 9, 4.1-9. doi:10.1167/9.10.4
13. Chen, Z., & Treisman, A. (2009). Implicit perception and level of processing in object-substitution masking. Psychological Science, 20, 560-567. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02328.x
14. Chong, S. C., Joo, S. J., Emmanouil, T. A., & Treisman, A. (2008). Statistical processing: Not so implausible after all. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 1327-1334. doi:10.3758/PP.70.7.1327
15. Chong, S. C., & Treisman, A. (2003). Representation of statistical properties. Vision Research, 43, 393-404. doi:10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00596-5
16. Chong, S. C., & Treisman, A. (2005a). Attentional spread in the statistical processing of visual displays. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 1-13. doi:10.3758/BF03195009
17. Chong, S. C., & Treisman, A. (2005b). Statistical processing: Computing the average size in perceptual groups. Vision Research, 45, 891-900. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2004.10.004
18. Choo, H., & Franconeri, S. L. (2010). Objects with reduced visibility still contribute to size averaging. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 86-99. doi:10.3758/APP.72.1.86
19. Corbett, J. E., & Oriet, C. (2011). The whole is indeed more than the sum of its parts: Perceptual averaging in the absence of individual item representation. Acta Psychologica, 138, 289-301. doi:10.1016/ j.actpsy.2011.08.002
20. 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.
21. Dakin, S. C., & Watt, R. J. (1997). The computation of orientation statistics from visual texture. Vision Research, 37, 3181-3192. doi:10.1016/ S0042-6989(97)00133-8
22. de Fockert, J. W., & Marchant, A. P. (2008). Attention modulates set representation by statistical properties. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 789-794. doi:10.3758/PP.70.5.789
23. Demeyere, N., Rzeskiewicz, A., Humphreys, K. A., & Humphreys, G. W. (2008). Automatic statistical processing of visual properties in simultanagnosia. Neuropsychologia, 46, 2861-2864. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia .2008.05.014
24. Di Lollo, V., Enns, J. T., & Rensink, R. A. (2000). Competition for consciousness among visual events: The psychophysics of reentrant visual processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 481-507. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.129.4.481
25. Di Lollo, V., Enns, J. T., & Rensink, R. A. (2002). Object substitution without reentry. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 594-596. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.131.4.594
26. Dux, P. E., Visser, T. A. W., Goodhew, S. C., & Lipp, O. V. (2010). Delayed reentrant processing impairs visual awareness: An objectsubstitution-masking study. Psychological Science, 21, 1242-1247. doi: 10.1177/0956797610379866
27. Emmanouil, T. A., & Treisman, A. (2008). Dividing attention across feature dimensions in statistical processing of perceptual groups. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 946-954. doi:10.3758/PP.70.6.946
28. Enns, J. T., & Di Lollo, V. (1997). Object substitution: A new form of masking in unattended visual locations. Psychological Science, 8, 135-139. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00696.x
29. Enns, J. T. (2004). Object substitution and its relation to other forms of visual masking. Vision Research, 44, 1321-1331. doi:10.1016/ j.visres.2003.10.024
30. Francis, G., & Cho, Y. S. (2007). Testing models of object substitution with backward masking. Perception & Psychophysics, 69, 263-275. doi:10.3758/BF03193748
31. Francis, G., & Hermens, F. (2002). Comment on "Competition for Consciousness Among Visual Events: The Psychophysics of Reentrant Visual Processes" (Di Lollo, Enns, & Rensink, 2000). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 590-593. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.131 .4.590
32. Franconeri, S. L., Alvarez, G. A., & Enns, J. T. (2007). How many locations can be selected at once. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1003-1012. doi:10.1037/ 0096-1523.33.5.1003
33. Haberman, J., Harp, T., & Whitney, D. (2009). Averaging facial expression over time. Journal of Vision, 9, 1.1-13. doi:10.1167/9.11.1
34. He, S., Cavanagh, P., & Intriligator, J. (1996). Attentional resolution and the locus of visual awareness. Nature, 383, 334-337. doi:10.1038/ 383334a0
35. Joo, S. J., Shin, K., Chong, S. C., & Blake, R. (2009). On the nature of the stimulus information necessary for estimating mean size of visual arrays. Journal of Vision, 9, 7.1-12. doi:10.1167/9.9.7
36. Juan, C. H., Campana, G., & Walsh, V. (2004). Cortical interactions in vision and awareness: Hierarchies in reverse. Progress in Brain Research, 144, 117-130. doi:10.1016/S0079-6123(03)14408-1
37. Koivisto, M., & Silvanto, J. (2011). Relationship between visual binding, reentry and awareness. Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal, 20, 1293-1303. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2011.02.008
38. Lamme, V. A. F., & Roelfsema, P. R. (2000). The distinct modes of vision offered by feedforward and recurrent processing. Trends in Neurosciences, 23, 571-579. doi:10.1016/S0166-2236(00)01657-X
39. Lamme, V. A. F. (2000). Neural mechanisms of visual awareness: A linking proposition. Brain & Mind, 1, 385-406. doi:10.1023/A: 1011569019782
40. Lamme, V. A. F. (2010). How neuroscience will change our view on consciousness. Cognitive Neuroscience, 1, 204-220. doi:10.1080/ 17588921003731586
41. Levi, D. M. (2008). Crowding-an essential bottleneck for object recog-FEATURE AVERAGING AND OSM 243 nition: A mini-review. Vision Research, 48, 635-654. doi:10.1016/ j.visres.2007.12.009
42. Miller, A. L., & Sheldon, R. (1969). Magnitude estimation of average length and average inclination. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 16-21. doi:10.1037/h0027430
43. Myczek, K., & Simons, D. J. (2008). Better than average: Alternatives to statistical summary representations for rapid judgments of average size. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 772-788. doi:10.3758/PP.70.5.772
44. Palmer, J. (1990). Attentional limits on the perception and memory of visual information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 332-350. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.16.2.332
45. Parkes, L., Lund, J., Angelucci, A., Solomon, J. A., & Morgan, M. (2001). Compulsory averaging of crowded orientation signals in human vision. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 739-744. doi:10.1038/89532
46. Rosenholtz, R. (1999). A simple saliency model predicts a number of motion popout phenomena. Vision Research, 39, 3157-3163. doi: 10.1016/S0042-6989(99)00077-2
47. Shapiro, K. L., Raymond, J. E., & Arnell, K. M. (1997). The attentional blink. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1, 291-296. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(97)01094-2
48. Silvanto, J., Lavie, N., & Walsh, V. (2005). Double dissociation of V1 and V5/MT activity in visual awareness. Cerebral Cortex, 15, 1736-1741. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhi050
49. Simons, D. J., & Myczek, K. (2008). Average size perception and the allure of a new mechanism. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 1335-1336. doi:10.3758/PP.70.7.1335
50. Spratling, M. W., & Johnson, M. H. (2004). A feedback model of visual attention. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 219-237. doi:10.1162/ 089892904322984526
51. 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
52. Treisman, A. (1996). The binding problem. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 6, 171-178. doi:10.1016/S0959-4388(96)80070-5
53. Watamaniuk, S. N., & Duchon, A. (1992). The human visual system averages speed information. Vision Research, 32, 931-941. doi:10.1016/ 0042-6989(92)90036-I
54. Whiting, B. F., & Oriet, C. (2011). Rapid averaging? Not so fast. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 484-489. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0071-3
55. Wolfe, J. M. (1998). What can 1 million trials tell us about visual search. Psychological Science, 9, 33-39. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00006
56. Woodman, G. F., & Luck, S. J. (2003). Dissociations among attention, perception, and awareness during object-substitution masking. Psychological Science, 14, 605-611. doi:10.1046/j.0956-7976.2003 .psci_1472.x