In two studies, observers searched for a single oblique target in a field of vertical distractors. In one experiment, target detection and identification (left versus right tilt) were compared. In another experiment, detection and localization were compared for the left versus the right half of the display. Performance on all three tasks was virtually identical: if a target could be detected, it could also be identified and localized. A review of previous studies generally supports the conclusion that performance on the three tasks is similar. This argues against current search theories, which rest heavily on data showing differences in identification and localization.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AtkinsonJBraddickO J, 1989“‘Where’ and ‘what’ in visual search”Perception18181–189
2.
AttneaveF, 1974“Apparent motion and the what—where connection”Psychologia17108–120
BarlowH, 1981“The Ferrier Lecture: Critical limiting factors in the design of the eye and visual cortex”Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B2121–34
7.
BarlowH, 1986“Why have multiple cortical areas?”Vision Research2681–90
8.
BeckJSutterAIvryR, 1987“Spatial frequency channels and perceptual grouping in texture segregation”Computer Vision, Graphics and Image Processing37299–325
9.
BraunJSagiD, 1990“Vision outside the locus of attention”Perception & Psychophysics4845–58
10.
CoweyA, 1979“Cortical maps and visual perception: The Grindley memorial lecture”Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology311–17
11.
CoweyA, 1981“Why are there so many visual areas?” in The Organization of the Cerebral Cortex Ed. SchmittF (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press)
12.
DeYoeE AVan EssenD C, 1988“Concurrent processing streams in monkey visual cortex”Trends in Neurosciences11219–226
13.
DuncanJ, 1989“Boundary conditions on parallel processing in human vision”Perception18457–469
14.
DuncanJHumphreyG, 1989“Visual search and stimulus similarity”Psychological Review98432–458
FolkC LEgethH, 1989“Does the identification of simple features require serial processing?”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance1597–110
17.
GreenM, 1986“What determines correspondence strength in apparent motion?”Vision Research26599–607
18.
GreenM, 1991“Visual search, visual streams and visual architectures”Perception & Psychophysics50388–403
19.
HubelDLivingstoneM, 1985“Complex-unoriented cells in a subregion of primate area 18”Nature (London)315325–327
20.
HubelDLivingstoneM, 1987“Segregation of form, color and stereopsis in primate area 18”Journal of Neuroscience73378–3417
21.
JohnstonJPashlerH, 1990“Identity and location in visual feature perception”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance16843–856
22.
KroseBJuleszB, 1989“The control and speed of shifts of attention”Vision Research291607–1619
23.
LivingstoneMHubelD, 1987“Psychophysical evidence for separate channels for the perception of form, color, motion and depth”Journal of Neuroscience73416–3468
24.
LivingstoneMHubelD, 1988“Segregation of form, color, movement and depth: Anatomy, physiology and perception”Science240740–749
25.
NakayamaK, 1990“The iconic bottleneck and the tenuous link between visual processing and perception”, in Vision: Coding and Efficiency Ed. BlakemoreC (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) pp 43–61
26.
NavonD, 1990“Does attention serve to integrate features?”Psychological Review97453–459
27.
NothdurftH, 1985“Sensitivity for structure gradient in texture discrimination tasks”Vision Research251957–1968
28.
NothdurftH, 1990“Texture segregation by associated differences in global and local luminance distribution”Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B239295–320
29.
PashlerH, 1987“Detecting conjunctions of color and form: Reassessing the serial search hypothesis”Perception & Psychophysics41191–201
30.
SagiD, 1990“Detection of an orientation singularity in Gabor textures: Effects of signal density and spatial frequency”Vision Research301377–1388
31.
SagiDJuleszB, 1985“‘Where’ and ‘what’ in vision”Science2281217–1219
32.
SagiDJuleszB, 1987“Short-range limitations on detection of feature differences”Spatial Vision239–49
33.
TreismanAGeladeG, 1980“A feature-integration theory of perception”Cognitive Psychology1297–136
34.
TreismanAGormicanS, 1988“Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries”Psychological Review9515–48
35.
TreismanASatoS, 1990“Conjunction search revisited”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance16459–478
36.
TreismanASchmidtH, 1982“Illusory conjunctions in the perception of objects”Cognitive Psychology1412–31
37.
TsalY, 1989“Do illusory conjunctions support feature-integration theory? A critical review of theory and findings”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance15394–400
38.
WatsonARobsonJ, 1981“Discrimination at threshold: Labelled detectors in human vision”Vision Research21341–347
39.
WolfeJCaveKFranzelS, 1989“A modified feature-integration model for visual search”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance15419–433
