Visual environments often contain multiple elements, some of which are similar to one another or spatially grouped together. In the current study we investigated how one can use perceptual groups in representing ensemble features of the groups. In experiment 1 we found that participants' performance improved when items were easily segmented by a grouping cue based on proximity, suggesting that spatial grouping facilitates extracting and remembering ensemble representations from visual arrays consisting of multiple elements. In experiment 2 we found that spatial grouping improved performance only when the grouped subsets were tested for the memory task, whereas it impaired performance when other subsets that were not grouped were tested, suggesting that the benefit from grouping may come from better extraction for storage, rather than later decision processes such as accessibility. Taken together, our results suggest that perceptual grouping of multiple items by proximity facilitates extraction of ensemble statistics from groups of items, enhancing visual memory of the ensembles in a visual array.
AlvarezG. A.CavanaghP. (2004). The capacity of visual short-term memory is set both by visual information load and by number of objects. Psychological Science, 15, 106–111.
2.
AlvarezG. A.OlivaA. (2008). The representation of simple ensemble visual features outside the focus of attention. Psychological Science, 19, 392–398.
3.
AlvarezG. A.OlivaA. (2009). Spatial ensemble statistics are efficient codes that can be represented with reduced attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 106, 7345–7350.
ArielyD. (2008). Better than average? When can we say that subsampling of items is better than statistical summary representations?Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 1325–1326.
6.
BeckJ. (Ed.). (1982). Organization and representation in perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7.
BradyT. F.AlvarezG. A. (2011). Hierarchical encoding in visual working memory: Ensemble statistics bias memory for individual items. Psychological Science, 22, 384–392.
8.
BradyT. F.KonkleT.AlvarezG. A. (2011). A review of visual memory capacity: Beyond individual items and toward structured representations. Journal of Vision, 11(5):4, 1–4.
9.
BrainardD. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436.
10.
ChaseW. G.EricssonK. A., (1981). Skilled memory. In AndersonJ. R. (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 141–189). Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
11.
ChenD.EngH. Y.JiangY. (2006). Visual working memory for trained and novel polygons. Visual Cognition, 14, 37–54.
CowanN. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 85–87.
14.
CowanN.ChenZ.RouderJ. N. (2004). Constant capacity in an immediate serial-recall task: A logical sequel to Miller (1956). Psychological Science, 15, 634–640.
15.
DakinS. C.TibberM. S.GreenwoodJ. A.KingdomR. A.MorganM. J. (2011). A common visual metric for approximate number and density. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 108, 19552–19557.
16.
EngH. Y.ChenD.JiangY. (2005). Visual working memory for simple and complex visual stimuli. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 1127–1133.
17.
FeigensonL. (2008). Parallel non-verbal enumeration is constrained by a set-based limit. Cognition, 107, 1–18.
18.
FeigensonL. (2011). Objects, sets, and ensembles. In DehaeneS.BrannonE. (Eds.), Attention and performance (Vol. XIV, pp. 13–22). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
19.
FeigensonL.HalberdaJ. (2008). Conceptual knowledge increases infants' memory capacity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 105, 9926–9930.
20.
FrithC.FrithU. (1972). The solitaire illusion: An illusion of numerosity. Perception & Psychophysics, 11, 409–410.
21.
GinsburgN. (1976). Effect of item arrangement on perceived numerosity: Randomness vs regularity. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 43, 663–668.
22.
GinsburgN.GoldsteinS. R. (1987). Measurement of visual cluster. The American Journal of Psychology, 100, 193–203.
23.
GoldsmithM. (1998). What's in a location? Comparing object-based and space-based models of feature integration in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 189–219.
24.
HabermanJ.WhitneyD. (2010). The visual system discounts emotional deviants when extracting average expression. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 1825–1838.
25.
HalberdaJ.SiresS. F.FeigensonL. (2006). Multiple spatially overlapping sets can be enumerated in parallel. Psychological Science, 17, 572–576.
26.
ImH. Y.ChongS. C. (2009). Computation of mean size is based on perceived size. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71, 375–384.
27.
ImH. Y.HalberdaJ. (2013). The effects of sampling and internal noise on the representation of ensemble average size. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 75, 278–286.
28.
KerstenD. (1987) Predictability and redundancy of natural images. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 4, 2395–2400.
29.
KoffkaK. (1935). Principles of gestalt psychology. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
30.
LuckS. J.VogelE. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390(6657), 279–281.
31.
LuckS. J.VogelE. K. (2013). Visual working memory capacity: From psychophysics and neurobiology to individual differences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17, 391–400.
32.
LyR.ImH. Y.HalberdaJ. (2009). Spatial overlap of collections affects the resolution of ensemble features. Journal of Vision, 9(8), 921 (Abstract).
33.
OlsonI. R.JiangY. (2005). Associative learning improves visual working memory performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 889–900.
PelliD. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437–442.
36.
PoltoratskiS.XuY. (2013). The association of color memory and the enumeration of multiple spatially overlapping sets. Journal of Vision, 13(8):6, 1–11.
37.
PylyshynZ. W.StormR. W. (1988). Tracking multiple independent targets: Evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. Spatial Vision, 3, 179–197.
38.
SchollB. J. (2001). Objects and attention: The state of the art. Cognition, 80, 1–46.
39.
SimonsD. J.LevinD. T. (1997). Change blindness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1, 261–267.
40.
TavesE. H. (1941). Two mechanisms for the perception of visual numerousness. Archives of Psychology, 37, 1–47.
41.
VictorJ. D.ConteM. M. (2004). Visual working memory for image statistics. Vision Research, 44, 541–556.
42.
VogelE. K.AwhE. (2008). How to exploit diversity for scientific gain: Using individual differences to constrain cognitive theory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 171–176.
43.
VogelE. K.WoodmanG. F.LuckS. J. (2001). Storage of features, conjunctions, and objects in visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 92–114.
44.
WheelerM. E.TreismanA. M. (2002). Binding in short-term visual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 48–64.
45.
WoodmanG. F.VeceraS. P.LuckS. J. (2003). Perceptual organization influences visual working memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 80–87.
46.
WolfeJ. M.VoM. L.EvansK. K.GreeneM. R. (2011). Visual search in scenes involves selective and nonselective pathways. Trends in Cognitive Science, 15, 77–84.
47.
XuY. (2006). Encoding objects in visual short-term memory: The roles of feature proximity and connectedness. Perception & Psychophysics, 68, 815–828.
48.
XuY.ChunM. M. (2007). Visual grouping in human parietal cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 104, 18766–18771.
49.
ZoshJ. M.FeigensonL., (2012). Memory load affects object individuation in 18-month old infants. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 113, 322–336.
