When a Reappearance Is Old News: Visual Marking Survives Occlusion

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 185-198

  Kunar, Melina A ^a   Humphreys, Glyn W ^a   Smith, Kelly J ^a   Watson, Derrick G ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; ILLUMINATION; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REACTION TIME; TIME; VISUAL FIELD;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTENTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); LIGHTING; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; REACTION TIME; TIME FACTORS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 85047690447     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.29.1.185     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Assad, J. A., & Maunsell, J. (1995, February 9). Neuronal correlates of inferred motion in primate posterior parietal cortex. Nature, 373, 518-521.
2. Baillargeon, R. (1986). Representing the existence and the location of hidden objects: Object permanence in six- and eight-month-old infants. Cognition, 23, 21-41.
3. Baillargeon, R., & DeVos, J. (1991). Object permanence in young infants: Further evidence. Child Development, 62, 1227-1246.
4. Baillargeon, R., & Graber, M. (1987). Where's the rabbit? 5.5 month-old infants' representation of the height of a hidden object. Cognitive Development, 2, 375-392.
5. Cavanagh, P. (1991). Short-range vs. long-range motion: Not a valid distinction. Spatial Vision, 5, 303-309.
6. Davis, G., & Driver, J. (1997). A functional role for illusory colour spreading in the control of focused visual attention. Perception, 26, 1397-1411.
7. Donk, M., & Theeuwes, J. (2001). Visual marking beside the mark: Prioritizing selection by abrupt onsets. Perception & Psychophysics, 93, 891-900.
8. Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433-458.
9. Enns, J. T., & Rensink, R., A. (1991). Preattentive recovery of three-dimensional orientation from line drawings. Psychological Review, 98, 335-351.
10. Horowitz, T., & Treisman, A. (1994). Attention and apparent motion. Spatial Vision, 8, 193-219.
11. Humphreys, G. W., Watson, D. G., & Jolicœur, P. (2002). Fractionating visual marking: Dual-task decomposition of the marking state by timing and modality. Journal of Experimental Psychology; Human Perception and Performance, 28, 640-660.
12. Kellman, P. J., & Spelke, E. R. (1983). Perception of partly occluded objects in infancy. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 483-524.
13. Olivers, C. N., & Humphreys, G. W. (2002). When visual marking meets the attentional blink: More evidence for top-down limited capacity inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 22-42.
14. Olivers, C. N. L., Watson, D. G., & Humphreys, G. W. (1999). Visual marking of locations and feature maps: Evidence from within-dimension defined conjunctions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52A, 679-715.
15. Scholl, B. J., & Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1999). Tracking multiple items through occlusion: Clues to visual objecthood. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 259-290.
16. Spelke, E. S., Breinlinger, K., Macomber, J., & Jacobson, K. (1992). Origins of knowledge. Psychological Review, 99, 605-632.
17. Treisman, A., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136.
18. Verstraten, F. A. J., Cavanagh, P., & Labianca, A. T. (2000). Limits of attentive tracking reveal temporal properties of attention. Vision Research, 40, 3651-3664.
19. Watson, D. G. (2001). Visual marking in moving displays: Feature-based inhibition is not necessary, Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 74-84.
20. Watson, D. G., & Humphreys, G. W. (1997). Visual marking: Prioritizing selection for new objects by top-down attentional inhibition of old objects. Psychological Review, 104, 90-122.
21. Watson, D. G., & Humphreys, G. W. (1998). Visual marking of moving objects: A role for top-down feature based inhibition in selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 946-962.
22. Watson, D. G., & Humphreys, G. W. (2000). Visual marking: Evidence for inhibition using a probe-dot detection paradigm. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 471-481.
23. Yantis, S., & Gibson, B. (1994). Object continuity in apparent motion and attention. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 182-204.
24. Yantis, S., & Hillstrom, A. P. (1994). Stimulus-driven attentional capture: Evidence from equiluminant visual objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 95-107.