Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 167, Issue 2, pp 246–259 | Cite as

Saccadic search performance: the effect of element spacing

  • Björn N. S. Vlaskamp
  • Eelco A. B. Over
  • Ignace Th. C. Hooge
Research Article

Abstract

In a saccadic search task, we investigated whether spacing between elements affects search performance. Since it has been suggested in the literature that element spacing can affect the eye movement strategy in several ways, its effects on search time per element are hard to predict. In the first experiment, we varied the element spacing (3.4°–7.1° distance between elements) and target–distracter similarity. As expected, search time per element increased with target–distracter similarity. Decreasing element spacing decreased the search time per element. However, this effect was surprisingly small in comparison to the effect of varying target–distracter similarity. In a second experiment, we elaborated on this finding and decreased element spacing even further (between 0.8° and 3.2°). Here, we did not find an effect on search time per element for element spacings from 3.2° to spacings as small as 1.5°. It was only at distances smaller than 1.5° that search time per element increased with decreasing element spacing. In order to explain the remarkable finding that search time per element was not affected for such a wide range of element spacings, we propose that irrespective of the spacing crowding kept the number of elements processed per fixation more or less constant.

Keywords

Visual search  Saccade Crowding 

References

  1. Bertera JH, Rayner K (2000) Eye movements and the span of the effective stimulus in visual search. Percept Psychophys 62:576–585PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bouma H (1970) Interaction effects in parafoveal letter recognition. Nature 226:177–178CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Brainard DH (1997) The psychophysics toolbox. Spat Vis 10:433–436PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Carrasco M, Evert DL, Chang I, Katz SM (1995) The eccentricity effect: target eccentricity affects performance on conjunction search. Percept Psychophys 57:1241–1261PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Chung TL, Levi DM, Legge GE (2001) Spatial-frequency and contrast properties of crowding. Vis Res 41:1833–1850CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Cornelissen FW, Peters EM, Palmer J (2002) The eyelink toolbox: Eye tracking with MATLAB and the psychophysics toolbox. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 34:613–617PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Engel FL (1977) Visual conspicuity, visual search and fixation tendencies of the eye. Vis Res 17:95–108CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. He S, Cavanagh P, Intriligator J (1996) Attentional resolution and the locus of visual awareness. Nature 383:334–337CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Hooge ITC, Erkelens CJ (1996) Control of fixation duration in a simple search task. Percept Psychophys 58:969–976PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Hooge ITC, Erkelens CJ (1999) Peripheral vision and oculomotor control during visual search. Vis Res 39:1567–1575CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Jacobs AM (1986) Eye-movement control in visual search: how direct is visual span control? Percept Psychophys 39:47–58PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Kooi FL, Toet A, Tripathy SP, Levi DM (1994) The effect of similarity and duration on spatial interaction in peripheral vision. Spat Vis 8:255–279PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Mackworth NH (1976) Stimulus density limits the useful field of view. In: Senders RAMJW (ed) Eye movements and psychological processes. Erlbaum, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  14. McConkie GW, Rayner K (1975) The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading. Percept Psychophys 17:578–586Google Scholar
  15. Moffitt K (1980) Evaluation of the fixation duration in visual search. Percept Psychophys 27:370–372PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Motter BC, Belky EJ (1998a) The zone of focal attention during active visual search. Vis Res 38:1007–1022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Motter BC, Belky EJ (1998b) The guidance of eye movements during active visual search. Vis Res 38:1805–1815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Näsänen R, Ojanpää H, Kojo I (2001) Effect of stimulus contrast on performance and eye movements in visual search. Vis Res 41:1817–1824CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Nattkemper D, Prinz W (1987) Saccade amplitude determines fixation duration: evidence from continuous search. In: O’Regan JK, Lévy-Schoen A (eds) Eye movements: from physiology to cognition. North-Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  20. Nazir TA (1992) Effects of lateral masking and spatial precueing on gap-resolution in central and peripheral vision. Vis Res 32:771–777CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. O’Regan JK (1990) Eye movements and reading. In: Kowler E (ed) Reviews in oculomotor research, vol 4. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 395–453Google Scholar
  22. O’Regan JK, Levy-Schoen A, Jacobs AM (1983) The effect of visibility on eye-movement parameters in reading. Percept Psychophys 34:457–464PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Pelli DG (1997) The video toolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. Spat Vis 10:437–442PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Rayner K (1998) Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychol Bull 124:372–422CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Rayner K, Fisher DL (1987a) Eye movements and the perceptual span during visual search. In: O’Regan JK, Lévy-Schoen A (eds) Eye movements: from physiology to cognition. North-Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  26. Rayner K, Fisher DL (1987b) Letter processing during eye fixations in visual search. Percept Psychophys 42:87–100PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Salthouse TA, Ellis CL (1980) Determinants of eye-fixation duration. Am J Psychol 93(2):207–234PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Scialfa CT, Joffe KM (1998) Response times and eye movements in feature and conjunction search as a function of target eccentricity. Percept Psychophys 60:1067–1082PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Sperling G, Budiansky J, Spivak JG, Johnson MC (1971) Extremely rapid visual search: the maximum rate of scanning letters for the presence of a numeral. Science 174:307–311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Toet A, Levi DM (1992) The two-dimensional shape of spatial interaction zones in the parafovea. Vis Res 32:1349–1357CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Van der Geest JN, Frens MA (2002) Recording eye movements with video-oculography and scleral search coils: a direct comparison of two methods. J Neurosci Methods 114:185–195CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Van der Steen J, Bruno P (1995) Unequal amplitude saccades produced by aniseikonic patterns: effect of viewing distance. Vis Res 35:3459–3471CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Verghese P, Pelli DG (1992) The information capacity of visual attention. Vis Res 32:983–995CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Widdel H, Kaster J (1981) Eye movement measurement in the assessment and training of visual performance. In: Moraal J, Kraiss KF (eds) Manned systems design, methods, equipment and applications. Plenum, New York, pp 251–270Google Scholar
  35. Wolfe JM, O’Neill P, Bennett SC (1998) Why are there eccentricity effects in visual search? Visual and attentional hypotheses. Percept Psychophys 60(1):140–156PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Wolford G, Chambers L (1983) Lateral masking as a function of spacing. Percept Psychophys 33:129–138PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Björn N. S. Vlaskamp
    • 1
  • Eelco A. B. Over
    • 2
  • Ignace Th. C. Hooge
    • 1
  1. 1.Psychonomics Department, Helmholtz InstituteUniversiteit UtrechtUtrechtThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Physics of Man, Helmholtz InstituteUniversiteit Utrecht The Netherlands

Personalised recommendations