Abstract
Stimulus A consisted of two proximal brackets with colinear lines separated by small gaps. Stimulus B was a square-like rectangle produced by inserting connecting segments into the gaps. Stimulus A was frequently represented as B (i.e., as closed). Following Pomerantz and Pristach (1989) and Treisman and Paterson (1984), perhaps A produced a closure emergent feature that was salient but otherwise independent of other features. However, adding the same two vertical lines (context) to both A and B produced a contrasting division outcome, even though the putative closure emergent feature was an element of the A + context stimulus, and even though it matched a physical feature of the B + context stimulus. Therefore, this emergent feature did not produce the closure. Two additional experiments indicated that the two context lines made the two connecting segments more visible—a context-produced increase in visibility occurred that is not comparable to other known evidence of perceptual improvement. This greater visibility also indicates that the division was not due to the two context lines inhibiting the perception of the two connecting segments, and the closure was not due to good continuation.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Banks, W. P., &Krajicek, D. (1991). Perception.Annual Review of Psychology,42, 305–331.
Biederman, I. (1972). Perceiving real-world scenes.Science,177, 77–80.
Biederman, I., Mezzanotte, R. J., &Rabinowitz, J. D. (1982). Scene perception: Detecting and judging objects undergoing relational violations.Cognitive Psychology,14, 143–177.
Buffart, H., Leeuwenberg, E., &Restle, F. (1981). Coding theory of visual pattern completion.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,7, 241–274.
Butler, B. E., Mewhort, D. J. K., &Browse, R. A. (1991). When do letter features migrate? A boundary condition for feature-integration theory.Perception & Psychophysics,49, 91–99.
Doyle, J. R., &Leach, C. (1988). Word superiority in signal detection: Barely a glimpse, yet reading nonetheless.Cognitive Psychology,20, 283–318.
Duncan, J. (1984). Selective attention and the organization of visual information.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,113, 501–517.
Eriksen, C. W., &Hoffman, J. E. (1972). Temporal and spatial characteristics of selective encoding from visual displays.Perception & Psychophysics,12, 201–204.
Ganz, L. (1966). Mechanism of the figurai after-effects.Psychological Review,73, 128–150.
Gillam, B. (1975). New evidence for “closure” in perception.Perception & Psychophysics,17, 521–524.
Hochberg, J., &Mcalister, E. (1953). A quantitative approach to figurai “goodness.”Journal of Experimental Psychology,46, 361–364.
Julesz, B. (1984). Toward an axiomatic theory of preattentive vision. In G. Edelman, W. Einer, & W. Cowan (Eds.),Dynamic aspects of neocortical function (pp. 585–612). New York: Wiley.
Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., &Burkell, J. (1983). The cost of visual filtering.Journal of Experimental Psychology; Human Perception & Performance,9, 510–522.
King, D. L. (1989, November).Brief discrete lines were perceived as continuous. Paper presented at the meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Chicago, IL.
King, D. L. (1990a). Gestalts are more closely associated with performance on a discrimination task than are component stimuli.American Journal of Psychology,103, 37–52.
King, D. L. (1990b). A large rectangle delays the perception of a separate small rectangle.Perception & Psychophysics,47, 369–378.
King, D. L. (1992).Discriminations between one and two lines. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Leeuwenberg, E. (1968).Structural information of visual patterns. The Hague: Mouton.
Pollatsek, A., &Digman, L. (1977). Dependent spatial channels in visual processing.Cognitive Psychology,9, 326–352.
Pomerantz, J. R., &Pristach, E. A. (1989). Emergent features, attention, and perceptual glue in visual form perception.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,15, 635–649.
Pomerantz, J. R., Sager, L. C, &Stoever, R. J. (1977). Perception of wholes and their component parts: Some configurai superiority effects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,3, 422–435.
Prinzmetal, W., &Banks, W. P. (1977). Good continuation affects visual detection.Perception & Psychophysics,21, 389–395.
Purcell, D. G., &Stewart, A. L. (1986). The face-detection effect.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,24, 118–120.
Purcell, D. G., &Stewart, A. L. (1988). The face-detection effect: Configuration enhances detection.Perception &. Psychophysics,43, 355–366.
Purcell, D. G., &Stewart, A. L. (1991). The object-detection effect: Configuration enhances perception.Perception & Psychophysics,50, 215–224.
Strasburger, H., Harvey, L. O., Jr., &Rentschler, I. (1991). Contrast thresholds for identification of numeric characters in direct and eccentric view.Perception & Psychophysics,49, 495–508.
Treisman, A. (1986). Properties, parts, and objects. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.),Handbook of perception and human performance: Vol. 2. Cognitive processes and performance (pp. 35XXX35XXX70). New York: Wiley.
Treisman, A., &Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention.Cognitive Psychology,12, 97–136.
Treisman, A., &Paterson, R. (1984). Emergent features, attention, and object perception.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 12–31.
Treisman, A., &Schmidt, H. (1982). Illusory conjunctions in the perception of objects.Cognitive Psychology,14, 107–141.
Weisstein, N. (1972). Metacontrast. In D. Jameson & L. M. Hurvich (Eds.),Handbook of sensory physiology: Vol. 7/4. Visual psychophysics (pp. 233–272). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Weisstein, N., &Harris, C. S. (1974). Visual detection of line segments: An object superiority effect.Science,186, 752–755.
Williams, A., &Weisstein, N. (1978). Line segments are perceived better in a coherent context than alone: An object-line effect in visual perception.Memory & Cognition,6, 85–90.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by the Howard University Faculty Research Support Grant Program and by National Institute of Mental Health ADAMHA-MARC Grant T-34-MH16580. Cornelius Lewis and Elizabeth Phillips provided assistance with data collection and analysis.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
King, D.L., Thomas, J. Two effects of context of the presence/absence of connecting segments. Perception & Psychophysics 53, 489–497 (1993). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205197
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205197