Abstract
Jolicoeur, Uliman, and MacKay (1986) showed that the time to confirm that two dots are on the same curve increases monotonically, but nonlinearly, as the curve distance between the two dots increases. These displays contained two curves and two dots. Onsame trials, the two dots were on the same curve (target curve), while the other curve served as a foil (distractor curve). The monotonically increasing effects of curve distance on response times-forsame trials suggested that the intervening curve segment was traced. In the present investigation of the source of the nonlinearity in these distance functions, it was hypothesized that- differences in the distractor curves may have allowed a curve tracing operator with zoom lens properties to widen its receptive field while tracing parts of certain target curves. The wider receptive field may have allowed faster tracing over certain segments, owing to a reduced number of shifts required by the operator to scan the curve. The consequence of training certain segments of the curve more quickly than other segments of the curve would be a nonlinear effect of distance. A new set of stimuli was created for testing this hypothesis directly. Fairly linear distance effects were found for stimuli that contained a distractor curve that constrained the breadth of the postulated curve tracing operator, whereas stimuli that contained a distractor curve that could allow for a larger receptive field yielded nonlinear distance functions. The results are compared with the predictions of three quantitative models: pixel-by-pixel tracing; Jolicoeur,Ullman, and MacKay’s(1991) bipartite operator; and a new zoom lens model, analogous to the zoom lens model of visual attention. The results were fit best by the latter model, in which tracing is accomplished by tracking the curve with a variably sized local operator.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Eriksen, C. W., &Hoffman, J. E. (1972). Temporal and spatial characteristics of selective encoding from visual displays.Perception & Psychophysics,12, 201–204.
Eriksen, C. W., &Rohrbaugh, J. W. (1970). Some factors determining efficiency of selective attention.American Journal of Psychology,83, 330–342.
Eriksen, C. W., &St. James, J. D. (1986). Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model.Perception & Psychophysics,40, 225–240.
Joucoeur, P. (1988). Curve tracing operations and the perception of spatial relations. In Z. Pylyshyn (Ed.),Computational processes in human vision: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 133–168). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Jolicoeur, P., &Ingleton, M. A. (1991). Size invariance in curve tracing.Memory & Cognition,19, 21–36.
Jolicoeur, P., Ullman, S., &MacKay, M. (1986). Curve tracing: A possible basic operation in the perception of spatial relations.Memory & Cognition,14, 129–140.
Jolicoeur, P., Ullman, S., & MacKay, M. (in press). Visual curve tracing properties.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.
McCormick, P. A., & Jolicoeur, P. (in press). Capturing visual attention and the curve tracing operation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.
McCormick, P. A., &Klein, R. M. (1991). The spatial distribution of attention during covert visual orienting.Acta Psychologica,75, 225–242.
Posner, M. I., Snyder, C. R. R., &Davidson, B. J. (1980). Attention and the detection of signals.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,109, 160–174.
Pringle, R., &Egeth, H. E. (1988). Mental curve tracing with elementary stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,14, 716–728.
Shepherd, M., &Müller, H. J. (1989). Movement versus focusing of visual attention.Perception & Psychophysics,46, 146–154.
Sternberg, S. (1969). Memory scanning: Mental processes revealed by reaction time experiments.American Scientist,57, 421–457.
Sternberg, S. (1975). Memory scanning: New findings and current controversies.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,27, 1–32.
Ullman, S. (1984). Visual routines.Cognition,18, 97–159.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Grant awarded to P. Jolicoeur.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McCormick, P.A., Jolicoeur, P. Predicting the shape of distance functions in curve tracing: Evidence for a zoom lens operator. Memory & Cognition 19, 469–486 (1991). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199570
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199570