Skip to main content
Download PDF

Visual marking in moving displays: Feature-based inhibition is not necessary

Perception & Psychophysics volume 63, pages 74–84 (2001)Cite this article

Abstract

Visual marking is a mechanism by which new visual stimuli can gain a selection advantage by the top-down attentional inhibition of stimuli already in the field. Previous work (Olivers, Watson, & Humphreys, 1999) has shown that, for moving stimuli, there must be a unique feature difference between the old items and the new items for marking to occur. The present study shows that this constraint is not necessary if the local spatial relationships between the old moving items remain constant. It is proposed that, with a fixed configuration, the old moving items can be grouped to form a single object. An inhibitory template set up to represent the object then coordinates the application of inhibition to the individual stimuli. Implications for the theory and ecological flexibility of visual marking are discussed.

References

  • Allport, D. A. (1987). Selection for action: Some behavioral and neurophysiological considerations of attention and action. In H. Heuer & A. F. Sanders (Eds.),Perspectives on perception and action (pp. 395–419). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chun, M. M., &Wolfe, J. M. (1996). Just say no: How are visual searches terminated when there is no target present?Cognitive Psychology,30, 39–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • De Bruyn, B., &Orban, G. A. (1993). Segregation of spatially superimposed optic flow components.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 1014–1027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, J. (1980). The locus of interference in the perception of simultaneous stimuli.Psychological Review,87, 272–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, J., &Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity.Psychological Review,96, 433–458.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., &Wright, J. H. (1994). The structure of attentional control: Contingent attentional capture by apparent motion, abrupt onset, and color.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,30, 317–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys, G. W., &Müller, H. J. (1993). Search via recursive rejection (SERR): A connectionist model of visual search.Cognitive Psychology,25, 43–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys, G. W., Quinlan, P. T., &Riddoch, M. J. (1989). Grouping processes in visual search: Effects with single- and combined-feature targets.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,118, 258–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys, G. W., Riddoch, M. J., &Quinlan, P. T. (1985). Interactive processes in perceptual organization: Evidence from visual agnosia. In M. I. Posner & O. S. M. Marin (Eds.),Attention and performance XI: Mechanisms of attention (pp. 301–318). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. H., &Blake, R. (1999). Visual form created solely from temporal structure.Science,284, 1165–1168.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maylor, E. A. (1985). Facilitatory and inhibitory components of orienting in visual space. In M. I. Posner & O. S. M. Marin (Eds.),Attention and performance XI: Mechanisms of attention (pp. 189–204). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olivers, C. N. L., Watson, D. G., &Humphreys, G.W. (1999). Visual marking of locations versus feature maps: Evidence from within-dimension defined conjunctions.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,52A, 679–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,32, 3–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I., &Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.),Attention and performance X: Control of language processes (pp. 531–556). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1989). The role of location indexes in spatial perception: A sketch of the FINST spatial-index model.Cognition,32, 65–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pylyshyn, Z. W., Burkell, J., Fisher, B., Sears, C., Schmidt, W., &Trick, L. (1994). Multiple parallel access in visual attentionCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,48, 260–283.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pylyshyn, Z. W., &Storm, R. W. (1988). Tracking multiple independent targets: Evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism.Spatial Vision,3, 179–197.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Qian, N., &Andersen, R. A. (1994). Transparent motion perception as detection of unbalanced motion signal:. II. Physiology.Journal of Neuroscience,14, 7367–7380.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Qian, N., Andersen, R. A., &Adelson, E.H. (1994). Transparent motion perception as detection of unbalanced motion signals. I. Psychophysics.Journal of Neuroscience,14, 7357–7366.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scholl, B. J., &Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1999). Tracking multiple items through occlusion: Clues to visual objecthood.Cognitive Psychology,38, 259–290.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, D. J. (1996). In sight, out of mind: When object representations fail.Psychological Science,7, 301–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, D. J., &Levin, D. T. (1997). Change blindness.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,1, 261–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, D. J., &Levin, D. T. (1998). Failure to detect changes to people during a real-world interaction.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,5, 644–649.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka, K., &Saito, H. (1989). Analysis of motion of the visual field by direction, expansion/contraction, and rotation cells clustered in the dorsal part of the medial superior temporal area of the macaque monkey.Journal of Neurophysiology,62, 626–641.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Theeuwes, J., Kramer, A. F., &Atchley, P. (1998). Visual marking of old objects.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,5, 130–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tipper, S. P., Driver, J., &Weaver, B. (1991). Object-centered inhibition of return of visual attention.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,43A, 289–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Townsend, J. T. (1972). Some results on the identifiability of parallel and serial processes.British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology,25, 168–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treisman, A. (1993). The perception of features and objects. In A. Baddeley & L. Weiskrantz (Eds.),Attention: Selection, awareness, and control (pp. 5–35). Oxford: Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treisman, A. M., &Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention.Cognitive Psychology,12, 97–136.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Treisman, A., &Sato, S. (1990). Conjunction search revisited.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 459–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trick, L. M., &Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1994). Why are small and large numbers enumerated differently? A limited-capacity preattentive stage in vision.Psychological Review,101, 80–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D. G., &Humphreys, G. W. (1997). Visual marking: Prioritising selection for new objects by top-down attentional inhibition.Psychological Review,104, 90–122.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D. G., &Humphreys, G. W. (1998). Visual marking of moving objects: A role for top-down feature-based inhibition in selection.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 3, 946–962.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D. G., &Humphreys, G. W. (1999). Segmentation on the basis of linear and local rotational motion: Motion grouping in visual search.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,25, 70–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D. G., &Humphreys, G. W. (2000). Visual marking: Evidence for inhibition using a probe-dot paradigm.Perception & Psychophysics,62, 471–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 202–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yantis, S. (1992). Multielement visual tracking: Attention and perceptual organization.Cognitive Psychology,24, 295–340.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yantis, S., &Hillstrom, A. P. (1994). Stimulus-driven attentional capture: Evidence from equiluminant visual objects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 95–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yantis, S., &Johnson, D. N. (1990). Mechanisms of attentional priority.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 812–825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yantis, S., &Jonides, J. (1984). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Evidence from visual search.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 601–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, England

    Derrick G. Watson

Authors
  1. Derrick G. Watson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Derrick G. Watson.

Additional information

This work was supported by grants from the Royal Society of Great Britain and from the Medical Research Council (U.K.).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Watson, D.G. Visual marking in moving displays: Feature-based inhibition is not necessary. Perception & Psychophysics 63, 74–84 (2001). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200504

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200504

Keywords

  • Visual Search
  • Display Size
  • Conjunction Search
  • Search Slope
  • Absent Trial