On the costs and benefits of faces and words: Process characteristics of feature search in highly meaningful stimuli.

Abstract

The authors present a comprehensive consideration of the process characteristics of visual search in contexts that vary in their meaningfulness. The authors frame hypotheses regarding process architecture, stopping rule, capacity, and channel independence, using analytic results and a rigorously specified dynamic system to characterize a set of alternative hypotheses that vary along all of these dimensions. Results of the tests of these hypotheses suggest that process architecture and the stopping rule do not distinguish the processing of meaningful and meaningless forms. The major distinction between configural and nonconfigural processing was with regard to processing capacity, potentially implicating channel interdependencies. All of these conclusions hold for both faces and words.

An examination of the processing capacity of features in the Thatcher illusion

“…There is, however, evidence that such experimental designs sometimes encourage analytic, nonconfigural perception of features in faces (Wenger & Townsend, 2001), while exhaustive processing promotes findings of supercapacity (Wenger & Townsend, 2006). The lack of a redundancy gain for grotesqueness detection here is in contrast with those of Bradshaw and Wallace (1971;also replicated by Perry, 2008, andPerry, Blaha, &Townsend, 2008), who found that the speed of same/different face judgements increased with the number of differences between the faces.…”

“…Future research should extend these findings such that the results can speak directly to the processing architecture and stopping rule, as well as to processing capacity. Such research should also evaluate performance in tasks that require exhaustive processing (e.g., Wenger & Townsend, 2006). We also suggest that other tasks used as markers of configurality should be explored in terms of processing capacity.…”

Interactions between facial emotion and identity in face processing: Evidence based on redundancy gains

“…Considerable evidence has indicated that, when a visual display contains two targets that require the same response, RTs are faster than when only one target appears (Krummenacher, Müller, & Heller, 2001;Miller, 1982Miller, , 1986Miller, Ulrich, & Lamarre, 2001;Mordkoff & Miller, 1993;Raab, 1962;Reinholz & Pollmann, 2007;Wenger & Townsend, 2006). For example, in Mordkoff and Miller's study, participants were required to divide their attention between the separable dimensions of color and shape, with all stimulus features being attributes of a single object.…”

Studying visual search using systems factorial methodology with target-distractor similarity as the factor

“…For example, when participants search for a single visual target among distractors that are highly similar to the target, mean RTs can increase in a linear fashion as a function of workload, thus suggesting serial processing (e.g., Atkinson et al, 1969;Townsend & Roos, 1973;Treisman & Gelade, 1980;Wolfe, Cave, & Franzel, 1989). On the other hand, under certain conditions and even with manipulation of workload, participants can exhibit rapid RTs or patterns of accuracy that are more compatible with parallel processing (e.g., Bacon & Egeth, 1994;Bundesen, 1990;Folk & Remington, 1998;Palmer et al, 2000;Pashler & Harris, 2001; Thornton & Gilden, 2007;Wenger & Townsend, 2006).…”

“…The nature of visual search and the factors affecting the speed of processing have been extensively studied over the past half-century. A number of models have been put forth to explain how response times (RTs) are influenced by various stimuli and experimental conditions (Bundesen, 1990;Duncan & Humphreys, 1989;Palmer, Verghese, & Pavel, 2000;Treisman & Sato, 1990;Wenger & Townsend, 2006;Wolfe, 1994). …”