Does linear separability really matter? Complex visual search is explained by simple search

被引:21
作者
Vighneshvel, T. [1 ]
Arun, S. P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Indian Inst Sci, Ctr Neurosci, Bangalore 560012, Karnataka, India
基金
英国惠康基金;
关键词
similarity; shape; perception; TOP-DOWN; NONSEPARABILITY; INTEGRATION; CONJUNCTION; MECHANISMS; ATTENTION; SELECTION; GUIDE; MODEL;
D O I
10.1167/13.11.10
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Visual search in real life involves complex displays with a target among multiple types of distracters, but in the laboratory, it is often tested using simple displays with identical distracters. Can complex search be understood in terms of simple searches? This link may not be straightforward if complex search has emergent properties. One such property is linear separability, whereby search is hard when a target cannot be separated from its distracters using a single linear boundary. However, evidence in favor of linear separability is based on testing stimulus configurations in an external parametric space that need not be related to their true perceptual representation. We therefore set out to assess whether linear separability influences complex search at all. Our null hypothesis was that complex search performance depends only on classical factors such as target-distracter similarity and distracter homogeneity, which we measured using simple searches. Across three experiments involving a variety of artificial and natural objects, differences between linearly separable and nonseparable searches were explained using target-distracter similarity and distracter heterogeneity. Further, simple searches accurately predicted complex search regardless of linear separability (r = 0.91). Our results show that complex search is explained by simple search, refuting the widely held belief that linear separability influences visual search.
引用
收藏
页数:24
相关论文
共 28 条
[21]   Distinct mechanisms account for the linear non-separability and conjunction effects in visual shape encoding [J].
Saumier, D ;
Arguin, M .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY SECTION A-HUMAN EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2003, 56 (08) :1373-1388
[22]   Neural mechanisms of saccade target selection: gated accumulator model of the visual-motor cascade [J].
Schall, Jeffrey D. ;
Purcell, Braden A. ;
Heitz, Richard P. ;
Logan, Gordon D. ;
Palmeri, Thomas J. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE, 2011, 33 (11) :1991-2002
[23]   Global Image Dissimilarity in Macaque Inferotemporal Cortex Predicts Human Visual Search Efficiency [J].
Sripati, Arun P. ;
Olson, Carl R. .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE, 2010, 30 (04) :1258-1269
[24]   GUIDED SEARCH - AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE FEATURE INTEGRATION MODEL FOR VISUAL-SEARCH [J].
WOLFE, JM ;
CAVE, KR ;
FRANZEL, SL .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 1989, 15 (03) :419-433
[25]   Changing your mind: On the contributions of top-down and bottom-up guidance in visual search for feature singletons [J].
Wolfe, JM ;
Butcher, SJ ;
Lee, C ;
Hyle, M .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 2003, 29 (02) :483-502
[26]   THE ROLE OF CATEGORIZATION IN VISUAL-SEARCH FOR ORIENTATION [J].
WOLFE, JM ;
STEWART, MI ;
FRIEDMANHILL, SR ;
OCONNELL, KM .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 1992, 18 (01) :34-49
[27]   What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it? [J].
Wolfe, JM ;
Horowitz, TS .
NATURE REVIEWS NEUROSCIENCE, 2004, 5 (06) :495-501
[28]   ON THE ROLE OF SYMMETRY IN VISUAL-SEARCH [J].
WOLFE, JM ;
FRIEDMANHILL, SR .
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 1992, 3 (03) :194-198