Simultaneous vs sequential discriminations of Markov-generated stimuli

Abstract

This experiment required

Effects of Presentation Type and Visual Control in Numerosity Discrimination: Implications for Number Processing?

“…Hence, in correspondence with our conclusion from a previous study (Smets et al, 2015 ), these results suggest that in some instances more than in others, the impact of the applied type of visual cue control is stronger. More concrete, simultaneously presenting participants with two dot arrays permits explicit and refined visual comparisons (Brown and Rebbin, 1970 ), leading participants to (un)consciously rely on or experience interference from automatically extracted visual cues (e.g., Clearfield and Mix, 2001 ; Hurewitz et al, 2006 ; Gebuis and Reynvoet, 2013 ). This unconscious reliance on or interference from visual cues can potentially increase performance if these cues provide additional and reliable information with respect to numerosity.…”

“…Despite the finding of Price et al ( 2012 ), psychophysical research outside the numerical cognition domain (Brown and Rebbin, 1970 ; Frick, 1985 ) suggests that a simultaneous paired vs. sequential presentation format could in fact be an important factor that may lead to incomparable effects/performances and a lack of validity, as is the case with entirely different tasks (Smets et al, 2014 ). Specifically and of importance for the topic of the current study, these studies suggest that the influence of visual cues and thus of the applied type of visual cue control may manifest itself differently when simultaneously vs. sequentially presenting stimuli.…”

“…Specifically and of importance for the topic of the current study, these studies suggest that the influence of visual cues and thus of the applied type of visual cue control may manifest itself differently when simultaneously vs. sequentially presenting stimuli. More concrete, simultaneously presenting stimuli in numerosity comparison allows explicit and refined comparisons of visual stimuli (Brown and Rebbin, 1970 ) and necessitates visuo-spatial short term memory (Frick, 1985 ). In addition, simultaneous comparison permits participants to attend to the stimuli in the most straightforward manner possible (Crowder, 1966 ).…”

“…Consequently, distinct types of visual cue control that differ in the level of information they provide with respect to numerosity, will influence performance. Whereas processing visual characteristics of the stimuli is evident in simultaneous comparison, sequential presentation of stimuli however, does not so readily lend itself to detailed visual comparison (Brown and Rebbin, 1970 ). Furthermore, visuo-spatial short term memory is not required with this presentation format (Frick, 1985 ).…”

Feature encoding and pattern classifications with sequentially presented Markov stimuli

“…Several experiments Brown & Dansereau, 1969;Brown & Dansereau, 1970;Brown & Rebbin, 1970;Brown, Walker, & Evans, 1968) have demonstrated that Ss can learn to discriminate among VARGUS 7 stimuli that are distortions of different prototypes withou t the benefit of knowledge of results or external reinforcement. In the same context, Evans and Arnoult (1967) have shown that Ss are able to successfully classify 50% redundant instances into categories that are representative of the underlying prototypes and can do so without information as to the number of schema families represented in the task (Bersted, Brown, & Evans, 1969).…”