scholarly journals A major role for retrieval and/or comparison in the set-size effects of change detection

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (13) ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
James C. Moreland ◽  
John Palmer ◽  
Geoffrey M. Boynton
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
James C. Moreland ◽  
John Palmer ◽  
Geoffrey M. Boynton

AbstractSet-size effects in change detection is often used to investigate the capacity limits of dividing attention. Such capacity limits have been attributed to a variety of processes including perception, memory encoding, memory storage, memory retrieval, comparison and decision. In this study, we investigated the locus of the effect of increasing set size from 1 to 2. To measure purely attentional effects and not other phenomena such as crowding, a precue was used to manipulate relevant set size and keep the display constant across conditions. The task was to detect a change in the orientation of 1 or 2 Gabor patterns. The locus of the capacity limits was determined by varying when observers were cued to the only stimulus that was relevant. We began by measuring the baseline set-size effect in an initial experiment. In the next experiment, a 100% valid postcue was added to test for an effect of decision. This postcue did not change the set-size effects. In the critical experiments, a 100% valid cue was provided during the retention interval between displays, or only one stimulus was presented in the second display (local recognition). For both of these conditions, there was little or no set-size effect. This pattern of results was found for both hard-to-discriminate stimuli typical of perception experiments and easy-to-discriminate stimuli typical of memory experiments. These results are consistent with capacity limits in memory retrieval, and/or comparison. For these set sizes, the results are not consistent with capacity limits in perception, memory encoding or memory storage.Significance SectionThe change detection paradigm is often used to demonstrate effects of divided attention. But it is not clear whether these effects are due to perception, memory, or judgment and decision. In this article, we present new evidence that the divided attention effect in change detection is due to limits in memory retrieval or comparison processes. These results are not consistent with limits in perception, memory encoding or memory storage.


2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
William X. Q. Ngiam ◽  
Kirsten C. S. Adam ◽  
Colin Quirk ◽  
Edward K. Vogel ◽  
Edward Awh

1998 ◽  
Vol 105 (1) ◽  
pp. 188-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan D. Cohen ◽  
Marius Usher ◽  
James L. McClelland

2019 ◽  
Vol 162 ◽  
pp. 8-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Hemström ◽  
Andrea Albonico ◽  
Sarra Djouab ◽  
Jason J.S. Barton

2002 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. 980-993 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuela Bricolo ◽  
Tiziana Gianesini ◽  
Alessandra Fanini ◽  
Claus Bundesen ◽  
Leonardo Chelazzi

In visual search, inefficient performance of human observers is typically characterized by a steady increase in reaction time with the number of array elements—the so-called set-size effect. In general, set-size effects are taken to indicate that processing of the array elements depends on limited-capacity resources, that is, it involves attention. Contrasting theories have been proposed to account for this attentional involvement, however. While some theories have attributed set-size effects to the intervention of serial attention mechanisms, others have explained set-size effects in terms of parallel, competitive architectures. Conclusive evidence in favor of one or the other notion is still lacking. Especially in view of the wide use of visual search paradigms to explore the functional neuroanatomy of attentional mechanisms in the primate brain, it becomes essential that the nature of the attentional involvement in these paradigms be clearly defined at the behavioral level. Here we report a series of experiments showing that highly inefficient search indeed recruits serial attention deployment to the individual array elements. In addition, we describe a number of behavioral signatures of serial attention in visual search that can be used in future investigations to attest a similar involvement of serial attention in other search paradigms. We claim that only after having recognized these signatures can one be confident that truly serial mechanisms are engaged in a given visual search task, thus making it amenable for exploring the functional neuro-anatomy underlying its performance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document