Abstract
These experiments examined one way in which the allocation of attentional resources can change performance during a visual discrimination task. Pigeons were trained to discriminate visual forms under conditions that produced dimensional contrast. In three experiments, negative training stimuli differed from positive stimuli either along a primary physical dimension alone or along both a primary dimension and an orthogonal dimension. When a negative stimulus differed from positive stimuli along two dimensions, discrimination of that negative stimulus improved. For one type of visual form, discrimination of the positive stimuli declined with orthogonal variation in a negative stimulus, whereas for other visual forms, there was no decline in performance. These results are consistent with a model of dimensional contrast that suggests that differences in the allocation of attentional resources determine discrimination performance. The results also indicate that the organization of stimulus dimensions plays a crucial role in the allocation of attentional resources in these settings.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Allan, S. E., &Blough, D. S. (1989). Feature-based search asymmetries in pigeons and humans.Perception & Psychophysics,46, 456–464.
Blough, D. S. (1972). Recognition by the pigeon of stimuli varying in two dimensions.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,18, 345–367.
Blough, D. S. (1975). Steady-state generalization and a quantitative model of operant generalization and discrimination.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,104, 3–21.
Blough, D. S. (1988). Quantitative relations between visual search speed and target-distracter similarity.Perception & Psychophysics,43, 57–71.
Blough, D. S. (1991). Perceptual analysis in pigeon visual search. In G. R. Lockhead & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.),The perception of structure (pp. 213–225). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Blough, D. S., &Blough, P. M. (1997). Form perception and attention in pigeons.Animal Learning & Behavior,25, 1–20.
Blough, P. M. (1989). Attentional priming and visual search in pigeons.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,15, 358–365.
Catania, A. C., &Gill, C. A. (1964). Inhibition and behavioral contrast.Psychonomic Science,1, 257–258.
Chase, S., &Heinemann, E. G. (1972). Choices based on redundant information: An analysis of two-dimensional stimulus control.Journal of Experimental Psychology,92, 161–175.
Garner, W. R. (1974).The processing of information and structure. Potomac, MD: Erlbaum.
Grau, J. W., &Kemler Nelson, D. G. (1988). The distinction between integral and separable dimensions: Evidence for the integrality of pitch and loudness.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,117, 347–370.
Hays, W. L. (1988).Statistics (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Hinson, J. M. (1988). Absolute and relative measures of dimensional contrast.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,50, 249–260.
Hinson, J. M., Cannon, C. B., &Tennison, L. R. (1998). Range effects and dimensional organization in visual discrimination.Behavioural Processes,43, 275–287.
Hinson, J. M., &Higa, J. J. (1989). Stimulus variation and dimensional contrast.Animal Learning & Behavior,17, 31–38.
Hinson, J. M., &Malone, J. C., Jr. (1980). Local contrast and maintained generalization.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,34, 263–272.
Hinson, J. M., &Tennison, L. R. (1997). An attentional model of dimensional contrast.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,23, 295–311.
Lockhead, G. R. (1970). Identification and the form of multidimensional stimulus space.Journal of Experimental Psychology,85, 1–10.
Maddox, W. T. (1992). Perceptual and decisional separability. In F. G. Ashby (Ed.),Multidimensional models of perception and cognition (pp. 147–180). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Monahan, J. S., &Lockhead, G. R. (1977). Identification of integral stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,106, 94–110.
Posner, M. I., &Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Facilitation and inhibition in the processing of signals. In P. M. A. Rabbitt & S. Dornic (Eds.),Attention and performance V (pp. 669–682). New York: Academic Press.
Reynolds, G. S. (1961). Contrast, generalization, and the process of discrimination.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,4, 289–294.
Shepard, R. N. (1991). Integrality versus separability of stimulus dimensions: From an early convergence of evidence to a proposed theoretical basis. In G. R. Lockhead & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.),The perception of structure (pp. 53–72). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
SYSTAT: The system for statistics [Computer software] (1990). Evanston, IL: SYSTAT.
Treisman, A., &Gormican, S. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries.Psychological Review,95, 15–48.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hinson, J.M., Cannon, C.B. & Tennison, L.R. Orthogonal stimulus variation and attention in dimensional contrast. Animal Learning & Behavior 27, 181–189 (1999). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199674
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199674