The effects of task and saliency on latencies for colour and motion processing

Adams, Wendy J.; Mamassian, Pascal

doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.2566

Cited by 31 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is interesting that the asynchrony vanished when biological motion stimuli were used (Aymoz & Viviani, 2004). In addition, there is research suggesting that the task used (Adams & Mamassian, 2004;Bedell, Chung, Ogmen, & Patel, 2003), attention (Enns & Oriet, 2004;Holcombe & Cavanagh, 2006), and motion direction (Arnold & Clifford, 2002) influence or explain the color-motion asynchrony.…”

Section: Spatial Versus Temporal Errorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptual asynchronies between color and motion at the onset of motion and along the motion trajectory

Gauch

Kerzel

2008

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Spatial Versus Temporal Errorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptual asynchronies between color and motion at the onset of motion and along the motion trajectory

Gauch

Kerzel

2008

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Without the exogenous ring cue transients, the available transients are weak, especially the motion transients (Adams & Mamassian, 2004;Nishida & Johnston, 2002) which can only be detected at slow rates (Werkhoven, Snippe, & Toet, 1992). While the color transient is stronger and access to the new color happens rapidly, access to the new motion value may be delayed after the reversal until the transient elicits attention.…”

Section: Ring Transients Allow Access To Motion and Color Without Difmentioning

confidence: 99%

Independent, synchronous access to color and motion features

Holcombe

Cavanagh

2008

Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated the role of attention in pairing superimposed visual features. When moving dots alternate in color and in motion direction, reports of the perceived color and motion reveal an asynchrony: the most accurate reports occur when the motion change precedes the associated color change by ~100 ms [Moutoussis, K., & Zeki, S. (1997). A direct demonstration of perceptual asynchrony in vision. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 264,[393][394][395][396][397][398][399]. This feature binding asynchrony was probed by manipulating endogenous and exogenous attention. First, endogenous attention was manipulated by changing which feature dimension observers were instructed to attend to first. This yielded little effect on the asynchrony. Second, exogenous attention was manipulated by briefly presenting a ring around the target, cueing the report of the color and motion seen within the ring. This reduced or eliminated the apparent latency difference between color and motion. Accuracy was best predicted by timing of each feature relative to the cue rather than the timing of the two features relative to each other, suggesting independent attentional access to the two features with an exogenous attention cue. The timing of attentional cueing affected feature pairing reports as much as the timing of the features themselves.

show abstract

“…For example, larger effects of stimulus intensities on RTs compared with TOJs have been reported for spatial frequency (Barr, 1983;Gish, Shulman, Sheehy, & Leibowitz, 1986;Tappe, Niepel, & Neurmann, 1994), retinal position (Jaskowski, 1987), stimulus duration (Jaskowski, 1992), attention (Neumann, Esselmann, & Klotz, 1993), salience (Adams & Mamassian, 2004), and the presence of a preceding stimulus (Kanai, Carlson, Verstraten, & Walsh, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Larger Stimuli Require Longer Processing Time for Perception

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The time it takes for a stimulus to reach awareness is often assessed by measuring reaction times (RTs) or by a temporal order judgement (TOJ) task in which perceived timing is compared against a reference stimulus. Dissociations of RT and TOJ have been reported earlier in which increases in stimulus intensity such as luminance intensity results in a decrease of RT, whereas perceived perceptual latency in a TOJ task is affected to a lesser degree. Here, we report that a simple manipulation of stimulus size has stronger effects on perceptual latency measured by TOJ than on motor latency measured by RT tasks. When participants were asked to respond to the appearance of a simple stimulus such as a luminance blob, the perceptual latency measured against a standard reference stimulus was up to 40 ms longer for a larger stimulus. In other words, the smaller stimulus was perceived to occur earlier than the larger one. RT on the other hand was hardly affected by size. The TOJ results were further replicated in a simultaneity judgement task, suggesting that the effects of size are not due to TOJ-specific response biases but more likely reflect an effect on perceived timing.

show abstract

The effects of task and saliency on latencies for colour and motion processing

Cited by 31 publications

References 34 publications

Perceptual asynchronies between color and motion at the onset of motion and along the motion trajectory

Perceptual asynchronies between color and motion at the onset of motion and along the motion trajectory

Independent, synchronous access to color and motion features

Larger Stimuli Require Longer Processing Time for Perception

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About