The evidence from an earlier report of global precedence in visual search is reexamined. Two new experiments are reported. The results of the first experiment indicate that the confusability of oblique orientations (a class-2 oblique effect) rather than global precedence was responsible for the earlier results. The results of the second experiment show that the effect critically depends on the presence of heterogeneous distractors rather than on differences in raw processing speed for different spatial scales. The possible role of symmetry is discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AppelleS, 1972“Perception and discrimination as a function of stimulus orientation: The ‘oblique effect’ in man and animals”Psychological Bulletin78266–278
2.
BaconW FEgethH E, 1991“Local processes in preattentive feature detection”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance1777–90
3.
BeckJ, 1972“Similarity grouping and peripheral discriminability under uncertainty”American Journal of Psychology851–19
4.
BoerL CKeussP J G, 1982“Global precedence as a post-perceptual effect: An analysis of speed – accuracy trade-off functions”Perception & Psychophysics31358–366
5.
BridgemanBAikenW, 1994“Attentional ‘popout’ and parallel search are separate phenomena”Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Supplement351623
6.
CallaghanT CLasagaM IGarnerW R, 1986“Visual texture segmentation based on texture and hue”Perception & Psychophysics3932–38
7.
DuncanJ, 1989“Boundary conditions on parallel processing in human vision”Perception18457–469
8.
DuncanJHumphreysG W, 1989“Visual search and stimulus similarity”Psychological Review96433–458
9.
DuncanJHumphreysG W, 1992“Beyond the search surface: Visual search and attentional engagement”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance18578–588
10.
EssockE A, 1980“The oblique effect of stimulus identification considered with respect to two classes of oblique effects”Perception937–46
11.
FosterD HWardP A, 1991“Asymmetries in oriented-line detection indicate two orthogonal filters in early vision”Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B24375–81
12.
Friedman-HillSWolfeJ M, 1995“Second-order parallel processing: Visual search for the odd item in a subset”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Peception and Performance21531–551
KimchiR, 1994“The role of wholistic/configural properties versus global properties in visual form perception”Perception23489–504
16.
KinchlaR A, 1974“Detecting target elements in multielement arrays: A confusability model”Perception & Psychophysics15149–158
17.
KinchlaR AWolfeJ M, 1979“The order of visual processing: ‘top-down’, ‘bottom-up’, or ‘middle out’”Perception & Psychophysics25225–231
18.
LambM RRobertsonL C, 1989“Do response time advantage and interference reflect the order of processing of global- and local-level information?”Perception & Psychophysics46254–258
19.
LasagaM IGarnerW R, 1983“The effect of line orientation on various information processing tasks”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance9215–225
20.
MartinM, 1979“Local and global processing: The role of sparsity”Memory & Cognition7476–484
21.
NavonD, 1977“Forest before the trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception”Cognitive Psychology9353–383
22.
OlsonR KAttneaveF, 1970“What variables produce similarity grouping?”American Journal of Psychology831–21
23.
PratherJ RKrebsW KSinaiM JMcCarleyJ SEssockE A, 1995“Oblique orientations are confused in visual search”Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Supplement36900
24.
SaarinenJ, 1994“Visual search for global and local stimulus features”Perception23237–243
25.
SaarinenJLeviD M, 1995“Orientation anisotropy in vernier acuity”Vision Research352449–2461
26.
TreismanA, 1991“Search, similarity, and integration of features between and within dimensions”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance17652–676
27.
TreismanAGormicanS, 1988“Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries”Psychological Review9515–48
28.
WardL M, 1982“Determinants of attention to local and global features of visual forms”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance8562–581
29.
WestlandSFosterD H, 1995“Optimized model of oriented-line-target detection using vertical and horizontal filters”Journal of the Optical Society of America A121617–1622
30.
WolfeJ M, 1992“‘Effortless’ texture segmentation and ‘parallel’ visual search are not the same thing”Vision Research32757–763
31.
WolfeJ M, in press “Visual search”, in Attention Ed. PaschlerH, (London: University College London Press)
32.
WolfeJ MFriedman-HillS R, 1992“On the role of symmetry in visual search”Psychological Science3194–198
33.
WolfeJ MFriedman-HillS RStewartM IO'ConnellK M, 1992“The role of categorization in visual search for orientation”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance1834–49
34.
WolfeS EDurginF H, 1997“Oblique effects and spatial scale in visual search”Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Supplement38367
35.
ZelinskyG JRaoR P NHayhoeM MBallardD H, 1996“Target localization in a realistic search task revealed by eye movements”, paper presented at the 1996 Center for Vision Science Symposium, Rochester, NY, June
