Occlusion, symmetry, and object-based attention: reply to Saiki (2000).

J. Saiki (2000) argued that, because the stimuli used by M. Behrmann, R. S. Zemel, and M. C. Mozer (1998) were confounded by symmetry, conclusions about whether amodally completed objects can benefit from object-based attention are unwarranted. Here, the authors examine J. Saiki's claim further and expand on their view of the mechanisms underlying object-based attention, suggesting that perceptual organization is the process whereby features from a single object are selectively attended. In light of this, they claim that heuristics such as symmetry and collinearity play an important role in the facilitation of features from a single object. In support of this claim, they present data from a further experiment using displays that exploit common fate, another grouping heuristic, and show that, under these conditions, the hallmark of object-based attention, a single-object advantage, is obtained for the occluded (amodally completed) shapes.

[1]  R. Zemel,et al.  Experience-Dependent Perceptual Grouping and Object-Based Attention , 2002 .

[2]  Refractor Vision , 2000, The Lancet.

[3]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Fractionating the binding process: neuropsychological evidence distinguishing binding of form from binding of surface features , 2000, Vision Research.

[4]  M. Behrmann,et al.  Selective attention to the parts of an object , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[5]  J. Saiki,et al.  Occlusion, symmetry, and object-based attention: comment on Behrmann, Zemel, and Mozer (1998). , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[6]  R A Abrams,et al.  Object-based visual attention with endogenous orienting , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[7]  Michael C. Mozer,et al.  A Principle for Unsupervised Hierarchical Decomposition of Visual Scenes , 1998, NIPS.

[8]  G W Humphreys,et al.  Neural representation of objects in space: a dual coding account. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[9]  R. Zemel,et al.  Object-based Attention and Occlusion Evidence from Normal Participants and a Computational Model Object-based Visual Attention , 1995 .

[10]  E Fox,et al.  Perceptual grouping and visual selective attention , 1998, Perception & psychophysics.

[11]  M. Goldsmith What's in a location? Comparing object-based and space-based models of feature integration in visual search. , 1998 .

[12]  Barry D. Vaughan,et al.  Object-Based Visual Selection: Evidence From Perceptual Completion , 1998 .

[13]  M. Farah,et al.  Is visual image segmentation a bottom-up or an interactive process? , 1997, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  A F Kramer,et al.  Object-based attentional selection--grouped arrays or spatially invariant representations?: comment on vecera and Farah (1994). , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[15]  J. Mattingley,et al.  Visual extinction and prior entry: Impaired perception of temporal order with intact motion perception after unilateral parietal damage , 1997, Neuropsychologia.

[16]  J. Mattingley,et al.  Preattentive Filling-in of Visual Surfaces in Parietal Extinction , 1997, Science.

[17]  S. Vecera Grouped arrays versus object-based representations : Reply to Kramer et al. (1997) , 1997 .

[18]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Grouping and Extinction: Evidence for Low-level Modulation of Visual Selection , 1996 .

[19]  N Lavie,et al.  On the spatial extent of attention in object-based visual selection , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Information integration in perception and communication , 1996 .

[21]  Jon Driver,et al.  Obligatory edge-assignment in vision: The role of figure and part segmentation in symmetry detection. , 1995 .

[22]  Jon Driver,et al.  One-Sided Edge Assignment in Vision: 1. Figure-Ground Segmentation and Attention to Objects , 1995 .

[23]  Shaun P. Vecera,et al.  Grouped locations and object-based attention: Comment on Egly , 1994 .

[24]  R. Rafal,et al.  Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[25]  M. Farah,et al.  Does visual attention select objects or locations? , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[26]  H. Egeth,et al.  Inhibition of return to object-based and environment-based locations , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[27]  S. Palmer,et al.  Rethinking perceptual organization: The role of uniform connectedness , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[28]  Jon Driver,et al.  Grouping reduces visual extinction: Neuropsychological evidence for weight-linkage in visual selection , 1994 .

[29]  G. Baylis,et al.  Visual attention and objects: evidence for hierarchical coding of location. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[30]  Matthew Flatt,et al.  PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers , 1993 .

[31]  Thomas F. Shipley,et al.  Perceiving Objects Across Gaps in Space and Time , 1992 .

[32]  Jon Driver,et al.  Preserved figure-ground segregation and symmetry perception in visual neglect , 1992, Nature.

[33]  A. Treisman Perceiving and re-perceiving objects. , 1992, The American psychologist.

[34]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Orientational Effects and Component Processes in Symmetry Detection , 1992 .

[35]  G. Baylis,et al.  Visual parsing and response competition: The effect of grouping factors , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[36]  Richard S. Zemel,et al.  Learning to Segment Images Using Dynamic Feature Binding , 1991, Neural Computation.

[37]  S. Rose Selective attention , 1992, Nature.

[38]  J. Driver,et al.  Can Visual Neglect Operate in Object-centred Co-ordinates? An Affirmative Single-case Study , 1991 .

[39]  A. Kramer,et al.  Perceptual organization and focused attention: The role of objects and proximity in visual processing , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[40]  P. Kellman,et al.  A theory of visual interpolation in object perception , 1991, Cognitive Psychology.

[41]  H E Egeth,et al.  Local processes in preattentive feature detection. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[42]  Elizabeth S. Spelke,et al.  Principles of Object Perception , 1990, Cogn. Sci..

[43]  G. Baylis,et al.  Movement and visual attention: the spotlight metaphor breaks down. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[44]  Z W Pylyshyn,et al.  Tracking multiple independent targets: evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. , 1988, Spatial vision.

[45]  J. Duncan Selective attention and the organization of visual information. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[46]  I. Rock The Logic of Perception , 1983 .

[47]  H. Barlow,et al.  The versatility and absolute efficiency of detecting mirror symmetry in random dot displays , 1979, Vision Research.

[48]  R. Nickerson Response Times for “Same”-“Different” Judgments , 1965, Perceptual and motor skills.

[49]  I. Rock,et al.  An experimental analysis of visual symmetry , 1963 .

[50]  M. Wertheimer Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt. II , 1923 .

[51]  Max Wertheimer,et al.  Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt , 2017 .

[52]  HighWire Press Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London , 1781, The London Medical Journal.

[53]  Steven J. Karau,et al.  Social Loafing: Research Findings^ Implications^ and Future Directions , 2022 .