David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In three experiments, subjects attempted to track multiple items as they moved independently and unpredictably about a display. Performance was not impaired when the items were briefly (but completely) occluded at various times during their motion, suggesting that occlusion is taken into account when computing enduring perceptual objecthood. Unimpaired performance required the presence of accretion and deletion cues along fixed contours at the occluding boundaries. Performance was impaired when items were present on the visual field at the same times and to the same degrees as in the occlusion conditions, but disappeared and reappeared in ways which did not implicate the presence of occluding surfaces (e.g. by imploding and exploding into and out of existence, instead of accreting and deleting along a fixed contour). Unimpaired performance did not require visible occluders (i.e. Michotte’s tunnel effect) or globally consistent occluder positions. We discuss implications of these results for theories of objecthood in visual attention.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Robin Jeshion (2009). The Significance of Names. Mind and Language 24 (4):370-403.
Eric Mandelbaum (2013). Numerical Architecture. Topics in Cognitive Science 5 (1):367-386.
Rachel Goodman (2012). Why and How Not to Be a Sortalist About Thought. Philosophical Perspectives 26 (1):77-112.
Fei Xu & Susan Carey (2000). The Emergence of Kind Concepts: A Rejoinder to Needham and Baillargeon (2000). Cognition 74 (3):285-301.
Trafton Drew, Todd S. Horowitz & Edward K. Vogel (2013). Swapping or Dropping? Electrophysiological Measures of Difficulty During Multiple Object Tracking. Cognition 126 (2):213-223.
Similar books and articles
Brian J. Scholla (2001). What is a Visual Object? Evidence From Target Merging in Multiple Object Tracking. Cognition 80 (1-2):159-177.
Zenon W. Pylyshynb, Jacob Feldmanb & Brian J. Scholla (2001). What is a Visual Object? Evidence From Target Merging in Multiple Object Tracking. Cognition 80 (1-2):159-177.
Zenon Pylyshyn (1994). Some Primitive Mechanisms of Spatial Attention. Cognition 50 (1-3):363-384.
Zenon Pylyshyn, Some Puzzling Findings in Multiple Object Tracking: I. Tracking Without Keeping Track of Object Identities.
Ronald A. Rensink (2002). Visual Attention. In L. Nagel (ed.), Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science. Macmillan.
Anthony A. Derksen (2004). Occlusion Shapes and Sizes in a Theory of Depiction. British Journal of Aesthetics 44 (4):319-341.
Patrick Wilken (2001). Capacity Limits for the Detection and Identification of Charge: Implications for Models of Visual Short-Term Memory. Dissertation, The University of Melbourne
R. Rensink (2000). Visual Search for Change: A Probe Into the Nature of Attentional Processing. Visual Cognition 7:345-376.
Brian J. Scholl (2000). Attenuated Change Blindness for Exogenously Attended Items in a Flicker Paradigm. Visual Cognition 7:377-396.
Zenon Pylyshyn, Some Puzzling Findings in Multiple Object Tracking (MOT): II. Inhibition of Moving Nontargets.
Basileios Kroustallis (2005). Blindsight. Philosophical Psychology 18 (1):31-43.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads5 ( #241,533 of 1,140,061 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #157,514 of 1,140,061 )
How can I increase my downloads?