바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

Article Contents

Prev
e-Submission

Vol.24 No.2

Citation Share

Review of Negative/Positive Repetition Effect in Visual Information Processing

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2012, v.24 no.2, pp.191-209
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2012.24.2.006

(2012). Review of Negative/Positive Repetition Effect in Visual Information Processing. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 24(2), 191-209, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2012.24.2.006

Abstract

Negative repetition effect (NRE) refers to the tendency for detection accuracy of a target to be lower when it has the same shape of distractor than when it has other distractors, in the post-cueing forced choice (PCFC) task, which requires participants to report the target post-cued among the two stimuli briefly presented. This task can be useful in studying minute characteristics of stimuli that perceptual systems are sensitive to in a well-controlled experimentation, as it makes participants pay full attention to minute aspects of stimuli on threshold. This paper describes PCFC task and related studies, and reviews current hypotheses of NRE. While reviewing the studies which observed positive repetition effects with dimensional attribute relation in a stimulus set (Garner, 1978a), unattended distractors, and whole report task, it is argued that there are some limitations with current explanations of NRE. In conclusion, notable points and research directions are commented.

keywords
부적 반복효과, 정적 반복효과, 강제선택 과제, 역, 순간노출, negative repetition effect, positive repetition effect, forced-choice task, threshold, brief presentation, negative repetition effect, positive repetition effect, forced-choice task, threshold, brief presentation

Reference

1.

김정오, 이상훈 (1994a). 부적반복효과에 대한 억제적 주의포착설 및 그 상대가설들의 검증(I). 한국심리학회 1994년 연차대회 학술발표 논문집. 119-128.

2.

김정오, 이상훈 (1994b). 부적반복효과에 대한 억제적 주의포착설 및 그 상대가설들의 검증(II). 한국심리학회 1994년 연차대회 학술발표 논문집. 129-136.

3.

박도형 (1991). 시각원소들에서의 반복효과. 미발표 학사학위 청구논문, 서울대학교.

4.

박민규 (1992). 표적자극과 방해자극의 공간배치가 색채 반복효과에 미치는 영향. 석사학위 청구논문. 서울대학교.

5.

박우형, 김정오 (1997). 부적 반복효과에 관한 반응편중설의 타당성 검토. 한국심리학회지: 실험 및 인지, 9, 99-114.

6.

박창호 (1993). 순간노출 상황에서 전역 및 국지 정보처리. 박사학위 청구논문. 서울대학교.

7.

박창호 (1995). 순간노출된 형태에서 출현 특징의 처리: 폐쇄와 정점. 한국심리학회지: 실험 및 인지, 7(2), 1-22.

8.

박창호 (1996). 한글 글자 처리의 단위: 반복효과 연구. 한국심리학회지: 실험 및 인지, 8, 189-206.

9.

박창호 (2001). 균질 연결성이 순간 노출된 형태의 지각에 미치는 영향. 인지과학, 12(4), 41-47.

10.

박창호 (2004a). 형태의 조직화에서 균질 연결성의 의의. 인지과학, 15, 17-22.

11.

박창호 (2004b). 순간 노출된 영역의 지각에서 균질 연결성의 효과. 한국심리학회지: 실험, 16, 211-224.

12.

박창호 (2005). 전역 및 국지 수준의 처리가 공간 주의의 분포에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 실험, 17, 171-183.

13.

박창호 (2008). 균일연결성과 보고과제 유형이 순간 노출된 형태의 지각에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 실험, 20, 39-54.

14.

박창호 (2010). 원은 좋은 형태인가? 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 22, 261-275.

15.

박형생 (1988). 초기시각에서 속성들의 반복효과. 석사학위청구논문. 서울대학교.

16.

Bjork, E. L., & Murray, J. T. (1977). On the nature of input channels in visual processing. Psychological Review, 84, 477-484.

17.

Egeth, H. E., & Santee, J. L. (1981). Conceptual and perceptual components of interletter inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 506-517.

18.

Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Memory & Cognition, 16, 143-149.

19.

Eriksen, C. W., & Eriksen, B. A. (1979). Target redundancy in visual search: Do repetitions of the target within the display impair processing? Perception & Psychophysics, 26, 195- 205.

20.

Eriksen, C. W., Morris, N, Yeh, Y.-Y., O'Hara, W., & Durst, R. T. (1981). Is recognition accuracy really impaired when the target is repeated in the display? Perception & Psychophysics, 30 (4), 375-385.

21.

Estes, W. K. (1982). Similarity-related channel interactions in visual processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 353-382.

22.

Gardner, G. T. (1973). Evidence for independent parallel channels in tachistoscopic perception. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 130-155.

23.

Garner, W. R. (1978a). Aspects of a stimulus: Features, dimensions, and configurations. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd. (Eds.), Cognition and Catergorization. Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum.

24.

Garner, W. R. (1978b). Selective attention to attributes and to stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 107, 287-308.

25.

Gross, J., Schmitz, F., Schnitzler, I., Kessler, K., Shapiro, K., Hommel, B., & Schnitzler, A. (2004). Modulation of long-range neural synchrony reflects temporal limitations of visual attention in humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101, 13050- 13055.

26.

Johnston, W. A., Hawley, K. J., Plewe, S. H., Elliott, J. M. G., & Dewitt, M, J. (1990). Attention capture by novel stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 397-411.

27.

Kanwisher, N. (1987). Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token individuation. Cognition, 27, 117-143.

28.

Kanwisher, N. (1991). Repetition blindness and illusory conjunctions: Errors in binding visual types with visual tokens. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 404-421.

29.

Keren, G., & Boer, L. C. (1985). Necessary conditions for repeated-letter inferiority: The role of positional uncertainty. In M. I. Posner & O. S. Marin (Eds.), Attention and Performance, XI. Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum.

30.

Kim, J.-O., & Kwak, H.-W. (1990). Stimulus repetition effects and the dimension- feature distinction in alternative targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 857-868.

31.

Kinchla, R. A. (1974). Detecting target elements in multielement arrays: A confusibility model. Perception & Psychophysics, 15, 149-158.

32.

Kuwana, T. (2007). Interference effect caused by repetition in visual recognition of letters: Examination of the orthographic difference between two same letters. Janpanese Psychological Research, 49, 288-295.

33.

Kwak, H.-W., Kim, J.-O., & Park, M.-K. (1993). Time courses of the negative and positive repetition effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 814-829.

34.

Mayall, K., & Humphreys, G. W. (2003). The time course of negative repetition effects in post-cue naming. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 56, 1335-1348.

35.

Palmer, S. E., & Rock, I. (1994). Rethinking perceptual organization: The role of uniform connectedness. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 29-55.

36.

Park, ChangHo (2009). Visual Processing of Hangul, the Korean Script. In Chungmin Lee, G. B. Simpson, Youngjin Kim (Eds.), The Handbook of East Asian Psycholinguistics, Vol. 3: Korean, Pp.379-389. Cambridge UP.

37.

Park, J., & Kanwisher, N. (1994). Determinants of repetition blindness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 500-519.

38.

Pelli, D. G., Farell, B., & Moore, D. C. (2003). The remarkable inefficiency of word recognition. Nature, 423, 752-756.

39.

Posner, M. I. (1978). Chronometric Explorations of Mind. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.

40.

Raffone, A., & Wolters, G. (2001). A Cortical Mechanism for Binding in Visual Working Memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13, 766-785.

41.

Santee, J. L., & Egeth, H. E. (1982). Do reaction time and accuracy measure the same aspects of letter recognition? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 489-501.

42.

Ulrich, R., & Miller, J. (2004). Threshold estimation in two-alternative forced-choice (2AFC) tasks: The Spearman-Kärber method. Perception & Psychophysics, 2004, 66, 517-533.

43.

Ward, L. M. (2003). Synchronous neural oscillations and cognitive processes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 553-559.

44.

Wühr, P., & Müsseler, J. (2005). When do irrelevant visual stimuli impair processing of identical targets? Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 897-909.

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy