Abstract
Processing visually degraded stimuli is a common experience. We struggle to find house keys on dim front porches, to decipher slides projected in overly bright seminar rooms, and to read 10th-generation photocopies. In this research, we focus specifically on stimuli that are degraded via reduction of stimuluscontrast and address two questions. First, why is it difficult to process low-contrast, as compared with high-contrast, stimuli? Second, is the effect of contrastfundamental in that its effect is independent of the stimulus being processed and the reason for processing the stimulus? We formally address and answer these questions within the context of a series of nested theories, each providing a successively stronger definition of what it means for contrast to affect perception and memory. To evaluate the theories, we carried out six experiments. Experiments 1 and 2 involved simple stimuli (randomly generated forms and digit strings), whereas Experiments 3–6 involved naturalistic pictures (faces, houses, and cityscapes). The stimuli were presented at two contrast levels and at varying exposure durations. The data from all the experiments allow the conclusion that some function of stimulus contrast combines multiplicatively with stimulus duration at a stage prior to that at which the nature of the stimulus and the reason for processing it are determined, and it is the result of this multiplicative combination that determines eventual memory performance. We describe a stronger version of this theory— the sensory response, information acquisition theory—which has at its core, the strong Bloch’s-law-like assumption of a fundamental visual system response that is proportional to the product of stimulus contrast and stimulus duration. This theory was, as it has been in the past, highly successful in accounting for memory for simple stimuli shown at short (i.e., shorter than an eye fixation) durations. However, it was less successful in accounting for data from short-duration naturalistic pictures and was entirely unsuccessful in accounting for data from naturalistic pictures shown at longer durations. We discuss (1) processing differences between short- and long-duration stimuli, (2) processing differences between simple stimuli, such as digits, and complex stimuli, such as pictures, (3) processing differences between biluminant stimuli (such as line drawings with only two luminance levels) and multiluminant stimuli (such as grayscale pictures with multiple luminance levels), and (4) Bloch’s law and a proposed generalization of the concept ofmetamers.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Atkinson, R. C., &Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K. W. Spence & J. T. Spence (Eds.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 2, pp. 90–197). New York: Academic Press.
Bamber, D. (1979). State trace analysis: A method of testing simple theories of causation.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,19, 137–181.
Bogartz, R. S. (1976). On the meaning of statistical interactions.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,22, 178–183.
Brainard, D. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox.Spatial Vision,10, 433–436.
Busey, T. A., &Loftus, G. R. (1994). Sensory and cognitive components of visual information acquisition.Psychological Review,101, 446–469.
Busey, T. A., &Loftus, G. R. (1998). Binocular information acquisition and visual memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 1188–1214.
Busey, T. A., Tunnicliff, J., Loftus, G. R., &Loftus, E. F. (2000). Accounts of the confidence—accuracy relation in recognition memory.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,7, 26–48.
Craik, F. I. M., &Lockhart, R. F. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,11, 671–684.
Gillund, G., &Shiffrin, R. M. (1984). A retrieval model for both recognition and recall.Psychological Review,91, 1–67.
Ginsburg, A. P., Cannon, M.W., &Nelson, M.A. (1980). Suprathreshold processing of complex visual stimuli: Evidence for linearity in contrast perception.Science,208, 619–621.
Gorea, A., &Tyler, C. W. (1986). New look at Bloch’s law for contrast.Journal of the Optical Society of America A,3, 52–61.
Graham, N. (1989). Visual pattern analyzers. New York: Oxford. Hintzman, D. L. (1984). MINERVA 2: A simulation model of human memory.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,16, 96–101.
Hirshman, E., &Mulligan, N. (1991). Perceptual interference improves explicit memory but does not enhance data-driven processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 507–513.
Kahneman, D., &Norman, J. (1964). The time—intensity relation in visual perception as a function of observer’s task.Journal of Experimental Psychology,68, 215–220.
Kaswan, J., &Young, S. (1963). Stimulus exposure time, brightness, and spatial factors as determinants of visual perception.Journal of Experimental Psychology,65, 113–123.
Laughery, K. R., Alexander, J. F., &Lane, A. B. (1971). Recognition of human faces: Effects of target exposure time, target position, pose position, and type of photograph.Journal of Applied Psychology,55, 477–483.
Loftus, G. R. (1978). On interpretation of interactions.Memory & Cognition,6, 312–319.
Loftus, G. R. (1985a). Consistency and confoundings: Reply to Slamecka.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,11, 817–820.
Loftus, G. R. (1985b). Evaluating forgetting curves.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,11, 396–405.
Loftus, G. R. (1985c). Picture perception: Effects of luminance level on available information and information extraction rate.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,114, 342–356.
Loftus, G. R., &Bamber, D. (1990). Weak models, strong models, unidimensional models, and psychological time.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,16, 916–926.
Loftus, G. R., Busey, T. A., &Senders, J.W. (1993). Providing a sensory basis for models of visual information acquisition.Perception & Psychophysics,54, 535–554.
Loftus, G. R., &Irwin, D. E. (1998). On the relations among different measures of visible and informational persistence.Cognitive Psychology,35, 135–199.
Loftus, G. R., Kaufman, L., Nishimoto, T., &Ruthruff, E. (1992). Effects of visual degradation on eye-fixation durations, perceptual processing, and long-term visual memory. In K. Rayner (Ed.),Eye movements and visual cognition: Scene perception and reading (pp. 203–226). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Loftus, G. R., &McLean, J. E. (1999). A front end to a theory of picture recognition.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,6, 394–411.
Loftus, G. R., &Ruthruff, E. R. (1994). A theory of visual information acquisition and visual memory with special application to intensity-duration tradeoffs.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 33–50.
Massaro, D., &Loftus, G. R. (1996). Sensory storage: Icons and echoes. In E. L. Bjork & R. A. Bjork (Eds.),Handbook of perception and cognition (Vol. 10, pp. 68–101). New York: Academic Press.
Morton, J. (1969). The interaction of information in word recognition.Psychological Review,76, 165–178.
Murdock, B. B. (1982). A theory for the storage and retrieval of item and associative information.Psychological Review,89, 609–626.
Murdock, B. B. (1993). TODAM2: A model for the storage and retrieval of item, associative, and serial order information.Psychological Review,100, 183–203.
Musselwhite, M. J., &Jeffreys, D. A. (1982). Pattern-evoked potentials and Bloch’s law.Vision Research,22, 897–903.
Nairne, J. S. (1988). The mnemonic value of perceptual identification.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,14, 248–255.
Norman, D. A. (1966). Acquisition and retention in short term memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology,72, 369–381.
Olds, E. S., &Engel, S. A. (1998). Linearity across spatial frequency in object recognition.Vision Research,38, 2109–2118.
Olzak, L. A., &Thomas, J. P. (1986). Seeing spatial patterns. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.),Handbook of perception and human performance: Vol. 1. Sensory processes and perception (pp. 7.1–7.56). New York: Wiley.
Paivio, A. (1969). Mental imagery in associative learning and memory.Psychological Review,76, 241–263.
Paivio, A. (1971).Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Palmer, J. C. (1986a). Mechanisms of displacement discrimination with and without perceived movement.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,12, 411–421.
Palmer, J. C. (1986b). Mechanisms of displacement discrimination with a visual reference.Vision Research,26, 1939–1947.
Peli, E. (1990). Contrast in complex images.Journal of the Optical Society of America,7, 2032–2040.
Pelli, D.G. (1997). The Video Toolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies.Spatial Vision,10, 437–442.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1970). A multicomponent theory of the perception of briefly exposed visual displays.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,7, 191–218.
Schacter, D. L., &Tulving, E. (Eds.) (1994).Memory systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Shibuya, H., &Bundesen, C. (1988). Visual selection from multielement displays: Measuring and modeling effects of exposure duration.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,14, 591–600.
Slamecka, N. J., &Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,4, 592–604.
Spekreijse, H., Van der Tweel, L. H., &Zuidema, T. (1973). Contrast evoked responses in man.Vision Research,13, 1577–1601.
Sperling, G. (1986). A signal-to-noise theory of the effects of luminance on picture memory: Comment on Loftus.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,115, 189–192.
Underwood, B. J. (1969). Attributes of memory.Psychological Review,76, 559–573.
van Nes, F. L., &Bouman, M. A. (1967). Spatial modulation transfer in the human eye.Journal of the Optical Society of America,57, 401–406.
Wandell, B. A. (1995).Foundations of vision. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
Watson, A. B. (1986). Temporal sensitivity. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.),Handbook of perception and human performance (Vol. I, pp. 6.1–6.43). New York: Wiley.
Wickelgren, W. A. (1972). Trace resistance and the decay of longterm memory.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,9, 418–455.
Wickelgren, W. A. (1974). Single-trace fragility theory of memory dynamics.Memory & Cognition,2, 775–780.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by NIMH Grant MH41637 to G.R.L. We thank Tom Busey for providing the hooded faces used in Experiment 3, Martin Oberg and Jessica Cooke for assistance in running the subjects in Experiments 3–6, and John Palmer, Trammel Neill, and two anonymous reviewers for very useful comments on an earlier version of this article.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Harley, E.M., Dillon, A.M. & Loftus, G.R. Why is it difficult to see in the fog? How stimulus contrast affects visual perception and visual memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 11, 197–231 (2004). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196564
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196564