2006
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040056
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Visual Clutter Causes High-Magnitude Errors

Abstract: Perceptual decisions are often made in cluttered environments, where a target may be confounded with competing “distractor” stimuli. Although many studies and theoretical treatments have highlighted the effect of distractors on performance, it remains unclear how they affect thequality of perceptual decisions. Here we show that perceptual clutter leads not only to an increase in judgment errors, but also to an increase in perceived signal strength and decision confidence on erroneous trials. Observers reported… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
48
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 72 publications
(51 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
2
48
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A model can be conceived in which threshold is determined jointly by the strength of the internal response to the target (determined by target size or target contrast) and target-flanker separation (the deleterious effects of the flankers decrease with distance). [The nature of the target flanker "interference" may take several different forms (Baldassi, Megna, & Burr, 2006;Greenwood, Bex, & Dakin, 2009May & Hess, 2007;Nandy & Tjan, 2007;Parkes, Lund, Angelucci, Solomon, & Morgan, 2001).] For large stimuli, flankers must be brought close in order for performance to come off the ceiling.…”
Section: Can Double Scaling Characterize Eccentricitydependent Changementioning
confidence: 99%
“…A model can be conceived in which threshold is determined jointly by the strength of the internal response to the target (determined by target size or target contrast) and target-flanker separation (the deleterious effects of the flankers decrease with distance). [The nature of the target flanker "interference" may take several different forms (Baldassi, Megna, & Burr, 2006;Greenwood, Bex, & Dakin, 2009May & Hess, 2007;Nandy & Tjan, 2007;Parkes, Lund, Angelucci, Solomon, & Morgan, 2001).] For large stimuli, flankers must be brought close in order for performance to come off the ceiling.…”
Section: Can Double Scaling Characterize Eccentricitydependent Changementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Tasks, which dissociate objective performance and subjectively perceived confidence, present an ideal tool to identify neurophysiological markers of confidence judgments (Maniscalco & Lau, 2012;Graziano & Sigman, 2009;Lau & Passingham, 2006). Different experimental situations may lead to distorted confidence judgments, for instance, when participants respond correctly with low confidence, as in blindsight or in implicit tasks (Merikle, Smilek, & Eastwood, 2001), and also in high confidence errorsfor instance, in detection tasks that lead to confounding of targets and distractors (Graziano & Sigman, 2009;Baldassi, Megna, & Burr, 2006). This is not just a reflection of noise in the confidence estimate but instead reflects a robust difference in the signals used for the commitment to a choice and for the construction of subjective confidence (Zylberberg, Barttfeld, & Sigman, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(2) The center of AVM malformations-commonly referred to as the nidus-usually manifests itself as a cluttered mass of blood vessels (Figure 1), which can increase the time and error rate for performing perceptual judgment tasks (e.g., judging relative depth) and may lead to an increase in decision confidence on erroneous trials [Baldassi et al 2006]. …”
Section: Motivation: Preoperative Planning Of Arteriovenous Malformatmentioning
confidence: 99%