Participants decided under speed stress whether or not the horizontal distances between pairs of frontal locations exceeded a criterion distance. The error rate reflected parallel effects of the horizontal and vertical distance between the locations. Whereas dimensional interaction in perceptual judgment has previously been attributed either to the perception of the stimulus or to the response decision concerning the stimulus, here dimensional interaction was attributed to the process of distance assessment regarding the test locations. Under the proposed account, the horizontal distance between the locations could not be assessed independently of the vertical distance. Only the overall distance between the locations could be assessed. However, because the horizontal and vertical positions of the locations could be independently assessed, the horizontal distance between the locations was available to the extent that the vertical positions of the locations were weighted so as to minimize vertical distance prior to the assessment of overall distance. In support of this account, parallel effects of horizontal and vertical distance were not observed when participants decided whether or not pairs of locations had the same horizontal position.
AsakuraN.InuiT. (2011). Disambiguation of mental rotation by spatial frames of reference. Perception, 2477–485.
2.
BurbeckC. A.HaddenS. (1993). Scaled position integration areas: Accounting for Weber's law for separation. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 105–15.
3.
BurnsB.SheppB. E. (1988). Dimensional interactions and the structure of psychological space: The representation of hue, saturation, and brightness. Perception & Psychophysics, 43494–507.
4.
CaclinA.GiardM.SmithB. K.McAdamsS. (2007). Interactive processing of timbre dimensions: A Garner interference study. Brain Research, 1138159–170.
5.
ChenD.LuH.HolyoakK. J. (2014). The discovery and comparison of symbolic magnitudes. Cognitive Psychology, 7127–54.
6.
CrawfordJ. D.HenriquesD. Y. P.MedendorpW. P. (2011). Three-dimensional transformations for goal-directed action. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 34309–331.
7.
DopkinsS. (2005). Access to dimensional values can be unselective during early perceptual processing. Perception & Psychophysics, 67513–530.
8.
DopkinsS.HoyerD. (submitted). Failure to assess horizontal distance independently of vertical distance.
9.
DopkinsS.SargentJ. (2014). Analyzing distances in a frontal plane. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76420–437.
10.
DosherB. A. (1982). Effect of sentence size and network distance on retrieval speed. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 8173–207.
11.
DosherB. A. (1984). Degree of learning and retrieval speed: Study time and multiple exposures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10541–574.
12.
FoleyJ. M.RibeiroN. P.Da SilvaJ. A. (2004). Visual perception of extent and the geometry of visual space. Vision Research, 44147–156.
13.
GescheiderG. A. (1997). Psychophysics: The fundamentals. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14.
GoldstoneR. L.SteyversM. (2001). The sensitization and differentiation of dimensions during category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130116–139.
15.
IntriligatorJ.CavanaghP. (2001). The spatial resolution of visual attention. Cognitive Psychology, 43171–216.
16.
KadlecH.HicksC. L. (1998). Invariance of perceptual spaces and perceptual separability of stimulus dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2480–104.
17.
KingstonJ.MacMillanN. A. (1995). Integrality of nasalization and F-sub-1 in vowels in isolation and before oral and nasal consonants. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, 971261–1285.
18.
KingstonJ.MacMillanN. A.DickeyL. W.ThorburnR. (1997). Integrality in the perception of tongue root position and voice quality in vowels. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, 971261–1285.
19.
KnillD. C.PougetA. (2004). The Bayesian brain: The role of uncertainty in neural coding and computation. Trends in Neuroscience, 27712–719.
20.
KnillD. C.RichardsW. (1996). Perception as Bayesian inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21.
KumadaT. (2001). Feature-based control of attention: Evidence for two forms of dimensional weighting. Perception & Psychophysics, 63698–708.
22.
LinkS. W. (1992). The wave theory of difference and similarity. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
MacMillanN. A.OrnsteinA. S. (1998). The mean-integral representation of rectangles. Perception & Psychophysics, 60250–262.
25.
MaddoxW. T. (1992). Perceptual and decisional separability. In AshbyF. Gregory (Ed.) Multidimensional models of perception and cognition (pp. 147–180). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
26.
MaddoxW. T. (2001). Separating perceptual processes from decision processes in identification and categorization. Perception & Psychophysics, 631183–1200.
27.
MaddoxW. T.AshbyF. G. (1993). Comparing decision-bound and exemplar models of categorization. Perception & Psychophysics, 5349–70.
28.
MaddoxW. T.AshbyF. G. (1996). Perceptual separability, decisional separability, and the identification–speed class relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22795–817.
29.
MaddoxW. T.DoddJ. L. (2003). Separating perceptual and decisional attention processes in the identification and categorization of integral-dimension stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29467–480.
30.
MaloneyL. T.MamassianP. (2009). Bayesian decision theory as a model of human visual perception: Testing Bayesian transfer. Visual Neuroscience, 26147–155.
31.
MatinL.LiW. (1995). Mulitmodal basis for egocentric spatial localization and orientation. Journal of Vestibular Research: Equilibrium & Orientation, 5499–518.
32.
MedendorpW. P.Van PeltS. (2011). Representation of 3D action space during eye and body motion. In HarrisL. R.JenkinM. R. M. (Eds.), Vision in 3D environments (pp. 187–207). New York: Cambridge University Press.
33.
MelaraR. D. (1989). Dimensional interaction between color and pitch. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1569–79.
34.
MelaraR. D. (1992). The concept of dimensional similarity: From psychophysics to cognitive psychology. In AlgonD. (Ed.), Psychophysical approaches to cognition (pp. 303–388). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
35.
MelaraR. D.MarksL. E. (1990a). Perceptual primacy of dimensions: Support for a model of dimensional interaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16398–414.
36.
MelaraR. D.MarksL. E. (1990b). HARD and SOFT interacting dimensions: Differential effects of dual context on classification. Perception & Psychophysics, 47307–325.
37.
MelaraR. D.O'BrienT. P. (1987). Interaction between synesthetically corresponding dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116323–336.
38.
MorganM. J. (1996). Visual illusions. In BruceV. (Ed.), Unsolved mysteries of the mind: Tutorial essays in cognition (pp 29–58). Hove, East Sussex: Erlbaum.
39.
MorganM. J.HoleG. J.GlennersterA. (1990). Biases and sensitivities in geometrical illusions. Vision Research, 301793–1810.
40.
MouW.LiuX.McNamaraT. P. (2009). Layout geometry in encoding and retrieval of spatial memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3583–93.
41.
MouW.McNamaraT. P. (2002). Intrinsic frames of reference in spatial memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28162–170.
42.
MouW.McNamaraT. P.ValiquietteC. M.RumpB. (2004). Allocentric and egocentric updating of spatial memories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30142–157.
43.
MullerH.O'GradyR. B. (2000). Dimension-based visual attention modulates dual-judgment accuracy in Duncan's (1984) one- versus two-object report paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 261332–1351.
44.
NosofskyR. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification–categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 11539–57.
45.
NosofskyR. M. (1987). Attention and learning processes in the identification and categorization of integral stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1387–109.
46.
PylyshynZ. W.StormR. W. (1988). Tracking multiple independent targets: Evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. Spatial Vision, 3179–197.
47.
SternbergS. (1998). How we compare objects. In ScarboroughD.SternbergS. (Eds.), Methods, models, and conceptual issues. An invitation to cognitive psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 365–454). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48.
SuzukiS.CavanaghP. (1997). Focused attention distorts visual space: An attentional repulsion effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23443–463.
49.
TaylorB. (1977). Dimensional interactions in vibrotactile information processing. Perception & Psychophysics, 21477–481.
50.
TsalY.ShalevL. (1996). Inattention magnifies perceived length: The attentional receptive field hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22233–243.
51.
ZhangH.MouW.McNamaraT. P. (2011). Spatial updating according to a fixed reference direction of a briefly viewed layout. Cognition, 119419–429.
