2011
DOI: 10.1068/p6892
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Flexible Resource Allocation for the Detection of Changing Visual Features

Abstract: Failure to detect change under circumstances where visual input is interrupted or attention is distracted is indicative of the capacity limits of visual short-term memory. The current study attempts to probe the nature of these limits. In experiment 1, the appearance of single Gabor patches was altered across colour, size, or speed, and set size was manipulated by means of a visual cue. In experiment 2, performance for detecting single and multiple changes to Gabor patches was compared under the constraint tha… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, it was thought that four would be enough, given that the relationship between the models and data was looked at for each observer individually (and for each it was found that the sample-size model yielded a much better fi t than the high-threshold model). Also, in this experiment, the display set-size was manipulated directly (ie by having more or less elements physically present) rather than cuing the relevant set size on each trial, as has been done elsewhere (Burmester and Wallis 2011a;Palmer 2000). Manipulating the display set-size directly is likely to introduce sensory effects not present in a cuing/relevant set-size paradigm.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it was thought that four would be enough, given that the relationship between the models and data was looked at for each observer individually (and for each it was found that the sample-size model yielded a much better fi t than the high-threshold model). Also, in this experiment, the display set-size was manipulated directly (ie by having more or less elements physically present) rather than cuing the relevant set size on each trial, as has been done elsewhere (Burmester and Wallis 2011a;Palmer 2000). Manipulating the display set-size directly is likely to introduce sensory effects not present in a cuing/relevant set-size paradigm.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…What our cueing manipulations seem to show is how the limited capacity and processing resources of VSTM can be prioritized by the visual system in a flexible manner to meet the observer's current goals. Indeed, previous work has similarly claimed that the feature contents of VSTM can vary according to top-down-directed goals (Burmester & Wallis, 2011;Davis & Holmes, 2005;Droll et al, 2005). Our results suggest, at least in the case of sameness detection, that this top-down influence is not just limited to how objects are initially represented, but may also extend to later feature comparison and decision processes associated with these representations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 52%
“…tial targets, neural representations of spatial locations or tem poral windows of the display are often conceptualized as providing separate sensory signals (e.g., Burmester & Wallis, 2011;Duncan, 1980;Eckstein, Thomas, Palmer, & Shimozaki, 2000;Heil, Verhey, & Zoefel, 2013;Meese & Williams, 2000;Palmer, Verghese, & Pavel, 2000;Tyler & Chen, 2000;Watson, 1979;Zenger & Fahle, 1997). Given that typical redundant signal tasks permit the exploitation of information from differ ent sources, an important question is how the outputs of these specialized channels, or other modular functional units, are combined.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In visual perception, much-investigated stimulus attributes activating such localized or specialized detectors are object orientation, spatial frequency, or spectral (i.e., wavelength) composition (for detailed summaries, see Graham, 1989; Howard & Rogers, 1995; for related research involving multimodal stimuli, see, for example, Spence, Baddeley, Zampini, James, & Shore, 2003; Wuerger, Hofbauer, & Meyer, 2003). Similarly, in tasks involving uncertainty about the spatial or temporal location of potential targets, neural representations of spatial locations or temporal windows of the display are often conceptualized as providing separate sensory signals (e.g., Burmester & Wallis, 2011; Duncan, 1980; Eckstein, Thomas, Palmer, & Shimozaki, 2000; Heil, Verhey, & Zoefel, 2013; Meese & Williams, 2000; Palmer, Verghese, & Pavel, 2000; Tyler & Chen, 2000; Watson, 1979; Zenger & Fahle, 1997). Given that typical redundant signal tasks permit the exploitation of information from different sources, an important question is how the outputs of these specialized channels, or other modular functional units, are combined.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation