Perception & Psychophysics

, Volume 68, Issue 7, pp 1153–1162 | Cite as

Attentional set for axis of symmetry in symmetry-defined visual search

  • Ryosuke Niimi
  • Kazuhiko Yokosawa
  • Katsumi Watanabe
Article

Abstract

Olivers and van der Helm (1998) showed that symmetry-defined visual search (for both symmetry and asymmetry) requires selective spatial attention. We hypothesize that an attentional set for the orientation of a symmetry axis also is involved in symmetry-defined visual search. We conducted three symmetry-defined visual search experiments with manipulations of the axis of symmetry orientations, and performance was better when the axis orientations within the search array were uniform, rather than a mixture of two orientations, and the attentional set for the axis orientation could be kept. In addition, search performance when the target was defined by the presence of symmetry was equivalent to that when the target was defined by a difference of symmetry axis orientation. These results suggest that attentional set for axis orientation plays a fundamental role in symmetry-defined visual search.

References

  1. Barlow, H. B., &Reeves, B. C. (1979). The versatility and absolute efficiency of detecting mirror symmetry in random dot displays.Vision Research,19, 783–793.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baylis, G. C., &Driver, J. (2001). Perception of symmetry and repetition within and across visual shapes: Part-descriptions and object-based attention.Visual Cognition,8, 163–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boutsen, L., &Marendaz, C. (2001). Detection of shape orientation depends on salient axes of symmetry and elongation: Evidence from visual search.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 404–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Duncan, J., &Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity.Psychological Review,96, 433–458.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Huang, L., &Pashler, H. (2002). Symmetry detection and visual attention: A “binary-map” hypothesis.Vision Research,42, 1421–1430.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Julesz, B. (1971).Foundations of cyclopean perception. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Morales, D., &Pashler, H. (1999). No role for colour in symmetry perception.Nature,399, 115–116.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Neisser, U. (1963). Decision-time without reaction-time: Experiments in visual scanning.American Journal of Psychology,76, 376–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Nothdurft, H.-C. (1993). Faces and facial expressions do not pop out.Perception,22, 1287–1298.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Olivers, C. N. L., &van der Helm, P. A. (1998). Symmetry and selective attention: A dissociation between effortless perception and serial search.Perception & Psychophysics,60, 1101–1116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Palmer, S. E., &Hemenway, K. (1978). Orientation and symmetry: Effects of multiple, rotational, and near symmetries.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,4, 691–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Parovel, G., &Vezzani, S. (2002). Mirror symmetry opposes splitting of chromatically homogeneous surfaces.Perception,31, 693–709.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pashler, H. (1990). Coordinate frame for symmetry detection and object recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 150–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Quinlan, P. T., &Humphreys, G. W. (1993). Perceptual frames of reference and two-dimensional shape recognition: Further examination of internal axes.Perception,22, 1343–1364.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Richards, J. T., &Reicher, G. M. (1978). The effect of background familiarity in visual search: An analysis of underlying factors.Perception & Psychophysics,23, 499–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rock, I. (1983).The logic of perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  17. Rock, I., &Leaman, R. (1963). An experimental analysis of visual symmetry.Acta Psychologica,21, 171–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Shen, J., &Reingold, E. M. (2001). Visual search asymmetry: The influence of stimulus familiarity and low-level features.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 464–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Treisman, A., &Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention.Cognitive Psychology,12, 97–136.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Treisman, A., &Gormican, S. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries.Psychological Review,95, 15–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Treisman, A., &Souther, J. (1985). Search asymmetry: A diagnostic for preattentive processing of separable features.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,114, 285–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wagemans, J., Van Gool, L., &d'Ydewalle, G. (1991). Detection of symmetry in tachistoscopically presented dot patterns: Effects of multiple axes and skewing.Perception & Psychophysics,50, 413–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wenderoth, P. (1994). The salience of vertical symmetry.Perception,23, 221–236.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wenderoth, P. (1996). The effects of dot pattern parameters and constraints on the relative salience of vertical bilateral symmetry.Vision Research,36,2311–23200.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wolfe, J. M. (2001). Asymmetries in visual search: An introduction.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 381–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ryosuke Niimi
    • 1
  • Kazuhiko Yokosawa
    • 1
  • Katsumi Watanabe
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.University of TokyoTokyoJapan
  2. 2.National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and TechnologyTsukubaJapan
  3. 3.Japan Science and Technology AgencyKanagawaJapan
  4. 4.Department of PsychologyUniversity of 7-3-1 HongoTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations