PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Z W Pylyshyn

Publications and source records attributed to Z W Pylyshyn.

12 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1994

Why are small and large numbers enumerated differently? A limited-capacity preattentive stage in vision.

"Subitizing," the process of enumeration when there are fewer than 4 items, is rapid (40-100 ms/item), effortless, and accurate. "Counting," the process of enumeration when there are more than 4 items, is slow (250-350 ms/item), effortful, and error-prone. Why is there a difference in the way the small and large numbers of items are enumerated? A theory of enumeration is proposed that emerges from a general theory of vision, yet explains the numeric abilities of preverbal infants, children, and adults. We argue that subitizing exploits a limited-capacity parallel mechanism for item individuation, the FINST mechanism, associated with the multiple target tracking task (Pylyshyn, 1989; Pylyshyn & Storm, 1988). Two kinds of evidence support the claim that subitizing relies on preattentive information, whereas counting requires spatial attention. First, whenever spatial attention is needed to compute a spatial relation (cf. Ullman, 1984) or to perform feature integration (cf. Treisman & Gelade, 1980), subitizing does not occur (Trick & Pylyshyn, 1993a). Second, the position of the attentional focus, as manipulated by cue validity, has a greater effect on counting than subitizing latencies (Trick & Pylyshyn, 1993b).

Adolescent↗
PubMed1993

What enumeration studies can show us about spatial attention: evidence for limited capacity preattentive processing.

Subitizing, the enumeration of 1-4 items, is rapid (40-120 ms/item) and accurate. Counting, the enumeration of 5 items or more, is slow (250-350 ms/item) and error-prone. Why are small numbers of items enumerated differently from large numbers of items? It is suggested that subitizing relies on a preattentive mechanism. Ss could subitize heterogeneously sized multicontour items but not concentric multicontour items, which require attentional processing because preattentive gestalt processes misgroup contours from different items to form units. Similarly, Ss could subitize target items among distractors but only if the targets and distractors differed by a feature, a property derived through preattentive analysis. Thus, subitizing must rely on a mechanism that can handle a few items at once, which operates before attention but after preattentive operations of feature detection and grouping.

Adult↗
PubMed1988

Tracking multiple independent targets: evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism.

There is considerable evidence that visual attention is concentrated at a single locus in the visual field, and that this locus can be moved independent of eye movements. Two studies are reported which suggest that, while certain aspects of attention require that locations be scanned serially, at least one operation may be carried out in parallel across several independent loci in the visual field. That is the operation of indexing features and tracking their identity. The studies show that: (a) subjects are able to track a subset of up to 5 objects in a field of 10 identical randomly-moving objects in order to distinguish a change in a target from a change in a distractor; and (b) when the speed and distance parameters of the display are designed so that, on the basis of some very conservative assumptions about the speed of attention movement and encoding times, the predicted performance of a serial scanning and updating algorithm would not exceed about 40% accuracy, subjects still manage to do the task with 87% accuracy. These findings are discussed in relation to an earlier, and independently motivated model of feature-binding--called the FINST model--which posits a primitive identity maintenance mechanism that indexes and tracks a limited number of visual objects in parallel. These indexes are hypothesized to serve the function of binding visual features prior to subsequent pattern recognition.

Algorithms↗
PubMed1987

Spatio-temporal parameters and the three-dimensionality of apparent motion: evidence for two types of processing.

The minimum ISI required for perceiving apparent motion in depth was measured as a function of the 2D separation of stimuli and the physical separation of stimuli in depth. It was found that temporal thresholds increased as a function of the separation of stimuli in depth. This supports the results of previous research indicating that the perceived three-dimensionality of apparent motion in depth increases with ISI. In addition, the rate of threshold increase was significantly greater in displays with short 2D separations of stimuli than in displays with large 2D separations. This robust functional dissociation of thresholds indicates that the short-range system may be involved in the processing of apparent motion in depth in the former case.

Depth Perception↗