Abstract
Much recent research in visual information processing has employed a methodology resting on the assumption that a noise mask following presentation of a target stimulus terminates processing of that target. In the absence of appropriate controls, such a methodology is viable only insofar as an erasure theory of masking is valid. However, the phenomena from which the erasure position has derived its strongest support have been subject to alternative theoretical explanations, the most general of which is that of temporal integration. The experiment reported here tested these alternatives. Twelve subjects served in a tachistoscopic study designed to determine whether the same noise field of dots could either erase a degraded target digit or facilitate target identification through temporal integration, under both forward and backward masking paradigms. This was found to be the case, and the results were interpreted as consistent with an integration theory of masking and as incompatible with an erasure conception. The results suggested that efforts to control target processing time through display of a visual noise pattern subsequent to target presentation are methodologically inadequate when devoid of some basic control operations.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Averaacn, E. The span of apprehension as a function of exposure duration.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1963,2, 60–64.
Averbach, E., &Coriell, A. S. Short-term memory in vision.Bell System Technical Journal, 1961,40, 309–328.
Blackwell, H. R. Neural theories of simple visual discriminations.Journal of the Optical Society of America, 1963,53, 129–160.
Bongartz, W., &Scheerer, E. Two visual stores and two processing operations in tachistoscopic partial report.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1976,28, 203–219.
Bruder, G. E., &Kietzman, M. L. Visual temporal integration for threshold, signal detectability, and reaction time measures.Perception & Psychophysics, 1973,13, 293–300.
Coheene, L. S.. &Bechtoldt, H. P. Visual recognition as a function of stimulus offset asynchrony and duration.Perception & Psychophysics, 1974,15, 221–226.
Colecate, R., Hovfraas, J. E., &Ermses, C. W. Selective encoding from multielement visual displays.Perception & Psychophysics, 1973,14, 217–224.
Coltneaar, M., &Aarnur, B. Evidence for an integration theory of visual masking.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1972,24, 262–269.
Davv, E. The intensity.time relation for multiple flashes of light in the peripheral retina.Journal of the Optical Society of America, 1952,42, 937–941.
Eriksen, C. W. Temporal luminance summation effects in backward and tbrward masking.Perception & Psychophysics, 1966,1, 87–92.
Eriksen, C. W., &Collins, J. F. Some temporal characteristics of visual pattern perception.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967,74, 476–484.
Eriksen, C. W., &Collins, J. F. Sensory traces versus the psychological moment in the temporal organization of form.Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1968,77, 376–382.
Eriksen, C. W., &Hoffman, M. Form recognition at brief duration as a function of adapting field and interval between stimulations.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1963,66, 485–499.
Eriksen, C. W., &Rohrbaugh, J. Visual masking in multielement displays.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,83, 147–154.
Haber, R. N. Note on how to choose a visual noise mask.Psychological Bulletin, 1970,74, 373–376.
Haber, R. N., &Standing, L. G. Clarity and recognition of masked and degraded stimuli.Psychonomic Science, 1968,13, 83–84.
Hogben, J. H., &Dilollo, V. Perceptual integration and perceptual segregation of brief visual stimuli.Vision Research, 1974,14, 1059–1069.
Johnston, J. C., &Mcclenland, J. L. Visual factors in word perception.Perception & Psychophysics, 1973,14, 365–370.
Kahneman, D. Temporal summation in an acuity task at different energy levels--a study of the determinants of summation.Vision Research, 1964,4, 557–566.
Kahneman, D. Exposure duration and effective figure greund contrast.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1965,17, 308–314.
Kahneman, D., &Norman, J. The time-intensity relation in visual perception as a function of the observer’s task.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1964,68, 215–220.
Kahneman, D., Norman, J., &Kubovy, M. The critical duration for the resolution of form: Centrally or peripherally determined?Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967,73, 323–327.
Keele, S. W.Attention and human performance. Pacific Palisades. Calif: Goodyear, 1973.
Kinsbourne, M., &Warrington, E. K. The effect of an aftercoming random pattern on the perception of brief visual stimuli.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1962,14, 223–234.
Lichtenstein, M., &Boucher, R. Minimum detectable dark interval between trains of perceptually fused flashes.Journal of the Optical Society, of America, 1960,50, 461–466.
Lindsey, P, H., &Norman, D. A.Human inforrmation processing. New York: Academic Press, 1972,
Pollack, I. Interaction effects in successive visual displays: An extension of the Eriksen-Collins paradigm.Perception & Psychophysics, 1973,13, 367–373.
Posner, M. I.Cognition: An introduction. Glenview, Ill Scott, Foresman, 1973.
Reicher, G. Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material.Journal Experimental Psychology, 1969,81, 276–280.
Rohrbaugh, J. W., &Eriksen, C. W. Reaction time measurement of temporal integration and organization of form.Perception & Psychophysics, 1975,17, 53–58.
Scheerer, E. Integration, interruption and processing rate in visual backward masking: 11. An experimental test.Psychologische Forschung. 1973,36, 95–115.
Schurman, D. L., Eriksen, C. W., &Rohrbaugh, J. Masking phenomena and time-intensity reciprocity for form.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968,78, 310–317.
Spencer, T., &Shuntich, R. Evidence for an interruption theory of backward masking.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,85, 198–203.
Sperling, G. A model for visual memory tasks.Human Factors, 1963,5, 19–31.
Turvey, M. T. On peripheral and central processes in vision.Psychological Review, 1973,80, 1–52.
Wheeler, D. D. Processes in word recognition.Cognitive Psychology, 1970,1, 59–85.
Wing, A., &Allport, D. A. Multidimensional encoding of visual form.Perception & Psychophysics, 1972,12, 474–476.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by Public Health Service Research Grant MH-1206 and United States Public Health Service Research Career Program Award K6-MH-22014 to the second author. The paper is based on a thesis submitted by the first author to the University of Illinois in partial fulfillment of the requirements for his master’s degree.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schultz, D.W., Eriksen, C.W. Do noise masks terminate target processing?. Memory & Cognition 5, 90–96 (1977). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209198
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209198