바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.22 No.4

Citation Share

세부특징부재 탐색과제에서 네-점 차폐와 역행패턴 차폐가 표적 변별에 미치는 영향

The Effect of Four-dot and Pattern-backward Masking on Target Identification in Feature-absent Search

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물 / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2010, v.22 no.4, pp.477-494
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2010.22.4.003
현주석 (중앙대학교)
현주석. (2010). 세부특징부재 탐색과제에서 네-점 차폐와 역행패턴 차폐가 표적 변별에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 22(4), 477-494, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2010.22.4.003

초록

시야의 한 위치에 연이어 순간적으로 제시된 두 자극이 있을 경우 후행 자극은 선행 자극의 변별을 어렵게 만드는 역행 차폐 현상을 초래한다. 본 연구는 최근 역행 차폐 현상을 설명하기 위한 새로운 모형으로 제시된 객체-대체 가설(object-substitution hypothesis)(Enns & Di Lollo, 1997, 2000)의 타당성을 조사하기위해, 네-점(four-dot) 및 역행패턴(pattern-backward) 차폐가 세부특징 부재(feature-absent) 탐색 과제의 표적 변별에 미치는 영향을 관찰하였다. 실험 1과 2에서는 버니어 상쇄(Vernier offset)가 부여되지 않은 표적을 탐색하는 과제와 다중 차폐(multiple masking) 패러다임을 사용하여 단일 차폐 자극으로의 공간적 주의 집중에 의한 표적 변별 오류의 발생 가능성을 최소화하였다. 그 결과, 네-점 차폐는 차폐소멸 지연시간이 늘어날수록 그리고 역행패턴 차폐는 차폐출현 지연시간이 줄어들수록 항목 개수의 증가에 따른 탐색 정확도의 감소 패턴이 더욱 두드러지게 나타났다. 이러한 결과는 두 차폐가, 초점 주의가 큰 영향을 미치는 지각 후(post-perceptual) 처리 단계나 감각적(sensory) 상호작용 단계보다는, 지각적(perceptual) 처리 단계에서 표적 변별을 방해함을 의미하며 따라서, 지각적 처리 단계의 객체-대체 현상에 의해 시각 차폐가 발생할 가능성을 시사한다.

keywords
backward masking, object-substitution hypothesis, feature-absent search, four-dot mask, attention, 역행 차폐, 객체-대체 가설, 세부특징부재 탐색, 네-점 차폐, 주의

Abstract

When two stimuli are briefly displayed in sequence at a location in the visual field, backward masking, in which identification of the preceeding stimulus is hindered by a subsequent mask stimulus, is induced. This study aimed to test the object-substitution hypothesis (Enns & Di Lollo, 1997, 2000) recently proposed for the mechanism of backward masking by observing the effect of four-dot and pattern-backward masking on target identification in a feature-absent search. Experiment 1 and 2 combined feature-absent search in which a target without a Vernier offset is searched after and multiple-masking paradigms to prevent immediate attention to a salient mask, and thus minimized target recognition errors by spatially focused attention onto a subsequent pop-out mask. The drop of target identification accuracy by increasing number of displayed items (setsize effect) was more evident as a mask-offset delay increases under the four-dot masking and as a mask-onset delay decreases under the pattern-backward masking respectively. The results indicate that both visual masking may occur due to object-substitution during a perceptual processing stage rather than a post-perceptual attentive or than a sensory interaction stage.

keywords
backward masking, object-substitution hypothesis, feature-absent search, four-dot mask, attention, 역행 차폐, 객체-대체 가설, 세부특징부재 탐색, 네-점 차폐, 주의

참고문헌

1.

현주석 (2008). 차폐 자극이 시각 작업 기억 비교 과정에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 실험, 20(3), 167‐178.

2.

Breitmeyer, B. (1984). Visual Masking: An Integrative Approach. New York: Oxford University Press.

3.

Breitmeyer, B., May, J. G., & Heller, S. S. (1991). Metacontrast reveals asymmetries at red‐green isoluminance. JOSA, 8(8), 1324‐1329.

4.

Breitmeyer, B., & Ogmen, H. (2000). Recent models and findings in visual backward masking: A comparison, reivew, and update. Perception & Psychophysics, 62(8), 1572-1595.

5.

Coltheart, M. (1980a). Iconic memory and visible persistence. Perception and Psychophysics, 27, 183-228.

6.

Coltheart, M. (1980b). The persistence of vision. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, B(290), 57-69.

7.

Di Lollo, V. (1980). Temporal integration in visual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 75-97.

8.

Di Lollo, V., & Dixon, P. (1988). Two forms of persistence in visual information processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14(4), 671-681.

9.

Di Lollo, V., Enns, J. T., & Rensink, R. A. (2000). Competition for consciousness among visual events: the psychophyics of reentrant visual processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129(4), 481-507.

10.

Di Lollo, V., Enns, J. T., & Rensink, R. A. (2002). Object substitution without reentry? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131(4), 594-596.

11.

Enns, J. T. (2004). Object substitution and its relation to other forms of visual masking. Vision Research, 44(12), 1321-1331.

12.

Enns, J. T., & Di Lollo, V. (1997). Object substitution: A new form of masking in unattended visual locations. Psychological Science, 8, 135-139.

13.

Enns, J. T., & Di Lollo, V. (2000). What's new in visual masking. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 345-351.

14.

Francis, G., & Cho, Y. S. (2007). Testing models of object substitution with backward masking. Perception & Psychophysics, 69(2), 263-275.

15.

Giesbrecht, B., Bischof, W. F., & Kingstone, A. (2003). Visual masking during the attentional blink: Tests of the object substitution hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 238-255.

16.

Giesbrecht, B. L., & Di Lollo, V. (1998). Beyond the attentional blink: Visual masking by object substitution. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1454-1466.

17.

Jonides, J., & Yantis, S. (1988). Uniqueness of abrupt visual onset in capturing attention. Perception and Psychophysics, 43, 346-354.

18.

Lleras, A., & Moore, C. M. (2003). When the target becomes the mask: Using apparent motion to isolate the object-level component of object-substitution masking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 106-120.

19.

Loftus, G. R., & Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1(4), 476-490.

20.

Luck, S. J., & Hillyard, S. A. (1994). Spatial filtering during visual search: Evidence from human electrophysiology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 1000‐1014.

21.

Luck, S. J., & Hillyard, S. A. (1995). The role of attention in feature detection and conjunction discrimination: An electrophysiological analysis. International Journal of Neuroscience, 80, 281-297.

22.

Neill, W. T., Hutchison, K. A., & Graves, D. F. (2002). Masking by object substitution: Dissociation of masking and cuing effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28(3), 682-694.

23.

Posner, M. I., Snyder, C. R. R., & Davidson, B. J. (1980). Attention and the detection of signals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 160‐174.

24.

Sperling, G. (1960). The information available in brief visual presentations. Psychological Monographs, 74, (Whole No. 498).

25.

Treisman, A. (1986). Features and objects in visual processing. Scientific American, 255(5), 114B-125.

26.

Treisman, A. (1988). Features and objects: The fourteenth Bartlett memorial lecture. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40, 201-237.

27.

Treisman, A., & Souther, J. (1985). Search asymmetry: A diagnostic for preattentive processing of separable features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 285-310.

28.

Vogel, E. K., Woodman, G. F., & Luck, S. J. (2006). The time course of consolidation in visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(6), 1436-1451.

29.

Woodman, G. F., & Luck, S. J. (2003). Dissociations among attention, perception, and awareness during object‐substitution masking. Psychological Science, 14, 605-111.

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물

논문 투고 OA 정책