Abstract
When attention is divided, a briefly presented target surrounded by four small dots is difficult to identify when the dots persist beyond target offset, but not when these dots terminate with the target. This object-substitution masking effect likely reflects processes at both the image level and the object level. At the image level, visual contours of the mask make feature extraction difficult. Recent data (Lleras & Moore, 2003) suggest that, at the object level, an object file is created for the target-plus-mask, and this single-object token later morphs into a single-object token containing the mask alone. In the present experiments, we used stimuli presented in 3-D space and apparent motion; the results indicate that object-substitution masking also arises when the mask and the target are represented in two separate object tokens and the mask token interferes with the target token.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Breitmeyer, B. G. (1984).Visual masking: An integrative approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
Breitmeyer, B. G., &Ogmen, H. (2000). Recent models and findings in visual backward masking: A comparison, review, and update.Perception & Psychophysics,62, 1572–1595.
Di Lollo, V., Enns, J. T., &Rensink, R. A. (2000). Competition for consciousness among visual events: The psychophysics of reentrant visual processes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,129, 481–507.
Enns, J. T., &Di Lollo, V. (1997). Object substitution: A new form of masking in unattended visual locations.Psychological Science,8, 135–139.
Enns, J. T., &Di Lollo, V. (2000). What's new in visual masking?Trends in Cognitive Sciences,4, 345–352.
Franconeri, S. L., &Simons, D. J. (2003). Moving and looming stimuli capture attention.Perception & Psychophysics,65, 999–1010.
He, Z. J., &Nakayama, K. (1994). Apparent motion determined by surface layout not by disparity of three-dimensional distance.Nature,367, 173–175.
Kahan, T. A., &Mathis, K. M. (2002). Gestalt grouping and common onset masking.Perception & Psychophysics,64, 1248–1259.
Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., &Gibbs, B. J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information.Cognitive Psychology,24, 175–219.
Kraut, R., Olson, J., Banaji, M., Bruckman, A., Cohen, J., &Couper, M. (2004). Psychological research online: Report of the board of scientific affairs' advisory group on the conduct of research on the Internet.American Psychologist,59, 105–117.
Lleras, A., &Moore, C. M. (2003). When the target becomes the mask: Using apparent motion to isolate the object-level component of object substitution masking.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,29, 106–120.
McGraw, K. O., Tew, M. D., &Williams, J. E. (2000). The integrity of Web-delivered experiments: Can you trust the data?Psychological Science,11, 502–506.
Moore, C. M., &Enns, J. T. (2004). Object updating and the flash-lag effect.Psychological Science,15, 866–871.
Moore, C. M., &Lleras, A. (2005). On the role of object representations in substitution masking.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,31, 1170–1180.
Neill, W. T., Hutchison, K. A., &Graves, D. F. (2002). Masking by object substitution: Dissociation of masking and cuing effects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,28, 682–694.
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., &Zuccolotto, A. (2002a).E-Prime reference guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools.
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., &Zuccolotto, A. (2002b).E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kahan, T.A., Lichtman, A.S. Looking at object-substitution masking in depth and motion: Toward a two-object theory of object substitution. Perception & Psychophysics 68, 437–446 (2006). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193688
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193688