Abstract
An investigation was made of the time course of perceptual grouping that is based on two qualitatively different spatial relationships: proximity and alignment. An index of grouping capacity was used to assess the processing time required before a backward pattern mask interfered with grouping. Stimuli consisted of bistable arrays of disjunct dots that were followed by a mask. Grouping cues, either proximity or alignment, were randomly assigned to either the horizontal or vertical orientation, and subjects indicated whether the dots appeared grouped as a series of horizontal or vertical lines. Spatial metrics of the cues were systematically altered until they no longer served as a cue for grouping, thereby determining the grouping threshold. The stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) of the mask, relative to the test stimulus, ranged from 33.3 to 150 msec. The SOA at which grouping thresholds first became elevated identified the point at which the mask first interfered with the grouping process, thereby identifying the processing time required for grouping by the specified cue. The processing time for grouping by proximity and alignment differed significantly, requiring means of 87.6 and 118.8 msec, respectively, for processing to be completed. These measurements serve to identify the processing time necessary for spatially integrating stimulus elements into unified forms, thereby delineating temporal constraints at this stage of visual processing.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Gillam, B. (1981). Separation relative to length determines the organization of two lines into a unit.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,7, 884–889.
Gillam, B., & Grant, T., Jr. (1984). Aggregation and unit formation in the perception of moving collinear lines. Perception, 13, 659-664. Kurylo, D. D. (1996).Effects of element separation and alignment on perceptual grouping. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Levitt, H. (1971). Transformed up—down methods in psychoacoustics.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,49, 467–477.
Oyama, T., &Yamada, W. (1978). Perceptual grouping between successively presented stimuli and its relation to visual simultaneity and masking.Psychological Research,40, 101–112.
Palmer, S. E. (1992). Common region: A new principle of perceptual grouping.Cognitive Psychology,24, 436–447.
Prytulak, L. S. (1974). Good continuation revisited.Journal of Experimental Psychology,102, 773–777.
Rush, G. P. (1937). Visual grouping in relation to age.Archives of Psychology,31 (Whole No. 217).
Uttal, W. R. (1969). Masking of alphabetic character recognition by dynamic visual noise (DVN).Perception & Psychophysics,6, 121–128.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kurylo, D.D. Time course of perceptual grouping. Perception & Psychophysics 59, 142–147 (1997). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206856
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206856