Multidimensional representation of objects—The influence of task demands

Abstract

In our daily life, we often encounter situations in which different features of several multidimensional objects must be perceived simultaneously. There are two types of environments of this kind: environments with multidimensional objects that have unique feature associations, and environments with multidimensional objects that have mixed feature associations. Recently, we (Goldfarb & Treisman, 2013) described the association effect, suggesting that the latter type causes behavioral perception difficulties. In the present study, we investigated this effect further by examining whether the effect is determined via a feedforward visual path or via a high-order task demand component. In order to test this question, in Experiment 1 a set of multidimensional objects were presented while we manipulated the letter case of a target feature, thus creating a visually different but semantically equivalent object, in terms of its identity. Similarly, in Experiment 2 artificial groups with different physical properties were created according to the task demands. The results indicated that the association effect is determined by the task demands, which create the group of reference. The importance of high-order task demand components in the association effect is further discussed, as well as the possible role of the neural synchrony of object files in explaining this effect.

The Effect of Feedback on Attention Allocation in Category Learning: An Eye Tracking Study

“…The suboptimal attention allocation observed in the present study and in Rehder and Hoffman (2005b) can be attributed to the nature of the task where classification is done based on spatially separated dimensions that are assumed to gain unique attentional advantage over time based on their contribution to the classification. This assumption may be challenged by the notion that features that are grouped together, gradually form a perception of a whole ( Goldfarb and Treisman, 2010 , 2013 ; Goldfarb and Sabah, 2016 ). Goldfarb and Sabah (2016) present the association effect as the cost in reaction time when binding a feature and an object that are inconsistently associated, and propose a process within the framework of the object file theory that allows the binding of such features with an object.…”

“…This assumption may be challenged by the notion that features that are grouped together, gradually form a perception of a whole ( Goldfarb and Treisman, 2010 , 2013 ; Goldfarb and Sabah, 2016 ). Goldfarb and Sabah (2016) present the association effect as the cost in reaction time when binding a feature and an object that are inconsistently associated, and propose a process within the framework of the object file theory that allows the binding of such features with an object. It is important to note that unlike the 5–4 paradigm where features differ in their relevance to the categorization, the features in Goldfarb and Treisman (2013) were equally relevant to the representation of the object.…”