PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Louise Alston

Publications and source records attributed to Louise Alston.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Subitization and attentional engagement by transient stimuli.

A series of experiments investigated the visual selection of moving and static items during enumeration. Small numbers of visual targets can be enumerated with little increase in reaction time and error with set size, a process referred to as 'subitization'. The number of items that can be subitized' is typically between one and four and known as the subitization range. This study looked for evidence of subitizing of subsets of items presented on a computer display. Fast and accurate enumeration was found for random configurations of moving targets even when presented among static distracters. This was not the case for static targets presented among moving or transient distracters. RTs to these targets were longer and showed a steady increase in RT with target number, even in the subitization range. However, when static targets and moving distracters were presented foveally, fast enumeration/subitization of the static targets was again possible. This was not due to reduced inter-item spacing, since linear effects of the number of targets still emerged when stimuli were presented peripherally but the size-spacing ratio was matched to the foveal presentations. There was indication that instead performance reflected perceived differences in movement speed for stimuli presented in parafoveal and more peripheral retinal regions. In support of this, subitization of static items improved as the movement speed of the distracters increased. The data suggest that the processes supporting subitization are highly sensitive to dynamic stimuli and depend on the ease of segmentation between static and moving arrays.

Adolescent↗

Set-size effects for spatial frequency change and discrimination in multiple targets.

In visual search tasks with a near-threshold target amongst distracters, log detection thresholds rise in proportion to the log of the number of stimuli. Previous research has shown a very steep slope for this set-size effect where the target is a change in spatial frequency (SF) across an ISI, suggesting a low-level explanation for 'change blindness (Wright et al., 2000). Here, we analyse stimulus and task variables in order to determine the contributions of stimulus detection and attention processes. Stimuli consisted of two 150 ms frames each containing 1 to 4 Gabor targets, with an ISI of 250 ms. In a 2AFC detection task with uniform distracters, slopes of 0.23-0.52 were found, in line with visual search results. 2AFC SF discrimination tasks gave slopes of 0.68, 0.69 with homogeneous distracters and 0.76-0.96 with inhomogeneous distracters, consistent with averaging of stimuli within a frame. If the distracters were also made to change across ISI, averaging was impossible, and focal attention was required to solve the discrimination. This always gave set-size slopes > 1. It is concluded that, under conditions where a stimulus array can be analysed globally, change detection performance is limited by signal detection mechanisms, rather than limited capacity attention or memory mechanisms. However, where this is prevented, for example by changing more than one item, limitations due to attention or memory produce an even steeper set-size effect.

Attention↗