Publications (14) View all
-
Article: Directional processing within the perceptual span during visual target localization.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In order to understand how processing occurs within the effective field of vision (i.e. perceptual span) during visual target localization, a gaze-contingent moving mask procedure was used to disrupt parafoveal information pickup along the vertical and the horizontal visual fields. When the mask was present within the horizontal visual field, there was a relative increase in saccade probability along the nearby vertical field, but not along the opposite horizontal field. When the mask was present either above or below fixation, saccades downwards were reduced in magnitude. This pattern of data suggests that parafoveal information selection (indexed by probability of saccade direction) and the extent of spatial parafoveal processing in a given direction (indexed by saccade amplitude) may be controlled by somewhat different mechanisms.Vision research 06/2010; 50(13):1274-82. · 2.29 Impact Factor -
Article: Eye movements and familiarity effects in visual search.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Familiarity with the distractors around an unfamiliar target facilitates visual search. Three Experiments examined whether the effect occurs because fixations are (a) shorter and fewer, (b) shorter, but more abundant, (c) equally long, but fewer, or (d) longer, but fewer when distractors are familiar. Results indicated comparably long, but fewer fixations when distractors are familiar. Hence, the theory that unfamiliar distractors need longer processing is discounted. In a fourth Experiment, a gaze-contingent moving window paradigm was used to control peripheral processing. Results revealed a wider span of effective processing for familiar distractors. A hypothesis based on low-level physiological processes is introduced to account for the familiarity effect.Vision Research 01/2002; 41(27):3763-73. · 2.41 Impact Factor -
Article: Eye-movement control in direction-coded visual search.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Subjects searched for a target among distractors which were arranged randomly or such that each distractor provided information about the relative position of a target. Trials were presented either in a blocked design (so that the subjects knew a priori the contextual information in the display) or in a mixed design. When the distractors provided information about target position, there were (i) shorter manual RTs, (ii) fewer fixations made in search of the target, (iii) longer mean fixation durations, (iv) shorter initial fixation durations, (v) shorter mean gaze shifts, (vi) a smaller area of fixation dispersion, and (vii) a greater percentage of optimally directed saccades. Except for gaze shifts, the results were uninfluenced by whether or not there was a blocked or a mixed presentation. The results of the study suggest that despite noise in the search mechanism, fixation durations were adjusted to process directly the currently fixated element(s).Perception 02/2001; 30(2):147-57. · 1.31 Impact Factor -
Article: Amodal completion and localization.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In a three-line vernier acuity task, a central line was localized between two aligned line segments. Accuracy did not improve when the segments formed a unified amodally completed percept. In a two-line vernier acuity task, a line was localized below a target line placed next to a physically segmented flank stimulus. Shifts in mean points of subjective equality suggested that amodally completed segments influenced localization. Previous conflicting findings are explained by a representation that is available early to influence perceived alignment. However, position tuning is poor. This representation may be realized physiologically by interpolation responses between amodally completed segments.Vision Research 02/2000; 40(4):383-90. · 2.41 Impact Factor -
Article: Temporal relationships between eye fixations and manual reactions in visual search.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Observers freely searched for, and manually responded to, the presence of a target in multistimulus displays. The stimuli were presented on a cinema screen such that each display subtended a large visual angle to encourage the use of eye movements. Times taken to initially fixate the target (T1Fs) were compared to manual response times (MRTs). The results of two experiments were qualitatively similar, despite different levels of difficulty between them. MRTs were a linear function of T1Fs, but only when fixations did not occur very early after the onset of the stimulus display. When fixations were made very soon after the onset of the display, T1Fs were independent of MRTs. The findings were described within the framework of a one-way synchronization model which was modified to accommodate attention effects in visual search. Finally, the methodology provides a novel means of quantifying the contributions of eye movements to manual acknowledgements in real-world vision-guided tasks.Acta Psychologica 04/1999; 101(1):105-23. · 2.26 Impact Factor
