Feature integration theory: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 01:34, 11 December 2012

Revision as of 22:54, 27 December 2012

Line 8:

[[File:FITstages.png|alt=The stages of feature integration theory]]

Treisman distinguishes between two kinds of visual search tasks, "feature search" and "conjunction search". Feature searches can be performed fast and pre-attentively for targets defined by only one feature, such as color, shape, perceived direction of lighting, movement, or orientation. Features should "pop out" during search and should be able to form illusory conjunctions. Conversely, conjunction searches occur with the combination of two or more features and are identified serially. Conjunction search is much slower than feature search and requires conscious attention and effort. In multiple experiments, some referenced in this article, Treisman concluded that [[color]], [[Orientation (geometry)|orientation]], and [[intensity (disambiguation)|intensity]] are features for which feature searches may be performed.

Line 34 ⟶ 33:

* Anne Treisman and [[Hilary Schmidt]] (1982). "Illusory conjunctions in the perception of objects." ''Cognitive Psychology'', Vol. 14, pp.&nbsp;107–141.<ref>'''Abstract'''

<br>In perceiving objects we may synthesize conjunctions of separable features by directing attention serially to each item in turn (A. Treisman and G. Gelade, ''Cognitive Psychology'', 1980, 12, 97-136). This feature-integration theory predicts that when attention is diverted or overloaded, features may be wrongly recombined, giving rise to "illusory conjunctions." The present paper confirms that illusory conjunctions are frequently experienced among unattended stimuli varying in color and shape, and that they occur also with size and solidity (outlined versus filled-in shapes). They are shown both in verbal recall and in simultaneous and successive matching tasks, making it unlikely that they depend on verbal labeling or on memory failure. They occur as often between stimuli differing on many features as between more similar stimuli, and spatial separation has little effect on their frequency. Each feature seems to be coded as an independent entity and to migrate, when attention is diverted, with few constraints from the other features of its source or destination.</ref>

*Anne Treisman and [[Janet Souther]] (1986). "Illusory words: The roles of attention and of top–down constraints in conjoining letters to form words." ''Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance'', Vol 12(1), pp. 3-17&nbsp;3–17

* Anne Treisman (1988). "Features and objects: the fourteenth Bartlett Memorial Lecture." ''Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology'', 40A, pp.&nbsp;201–236.

*Anne Treisman and [[Nancy Kanwisher]] (1998). "Perceiving visually presented objects: recognition, awareness, and modularity." ''Current Opinion in Neurobiology'', '''8''', pp.&nbsp;218–226.

*J. M. Wolfe (1994). "Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search." ''Psychonomic Bulletin & Review'', Vol 1, pp.202-238&nbsp;202–238

; Notes

Line 48 ⟶ 47:

[[Category:Cognition]]

[[Category:Human–computer interaction]]

{{cognitive-psych-stub}}

[[de:Merkmalsintegrationstheorie]]