Minimal Use of Working Memory in a Comparative Search for Feature Differences

Studies of Psychology and Behavior ›› 2017, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (1): 49-53.

Previous Articles Next Articles

Minimal Use of Working Memory in a Comparative Search for Feature Differences

Su Juan^1,2, Bai Xuejun¹, Wang Chao³, Yin Guo'en¹

1 Academy of psychology and behavior, Tianjin normal university, Tianjin 300074;
2 Institute of Mathematics and Statistics, Inner Mongolia of Finance and Economics University, Hohhot 010070;
3 Department of Psychology, Neuroscience and Behaviour, McMaster University, Canada

Received:2016-11-14 Online:2017-03-02 Published:2017-01-20

比较视觉搜索任务中工作记忆最小化的眼动研究*

苏娟^1,2, 白学军¹, 王超³, 阴国恩¹,

1教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地天津师范大学心理与行为研究院,天津 300074
2 内蒙古财经大学统计与数学学院,呼和浩特 010070
3 麦克马斯特大学心理神经科学与行为系,加拿大 L8S 4L8

通讯作者: 阴国恩,E-mail: yinguoen@mail.tjnu.edu.cn。
基金资助:
天津市高等学校心理健康与行为调控创新团队（39）、天津市科技计划项目（12ZCZDSF07100）和国家自然科学基金项目（81471629）

Abstract

Abstract: We manipulated the display size and object identities to investigate whether the comparative search task follows minimal use of working memory and priority for processing features using eye tracking. The number of fixations per scene glance suggested that on average, 1.65 objects per fixation were encoded and maintained in visual working memory despite increased display size. Fixation times were shorter for redundant trials than for color-only and shape-only trials, and no difference between color-only and shape-only trials. These results demonstrated that the number of features is of greater attentional priority than feature characteristics. Participants mostly used systematic search strategy to complete the tasks when they were provided no instruction regarding the visual-spatial processing strategy they were to employ.

Key words: comparative search task, minimal use of working memory, eye movement

摘要： 采用比较视觉搜索任务和眼动追踪技术,通过增加组成图片的图形数量和改变不同图形的特征属性,考察比较视觉搜索任务是否遵循工作记忆最小化原则以及图形特征加工的优先性问题。结果表明图形数量的增加不影响平均每次注视的图形数量,被试平均每次注视1.65个图形,即比较视觉搜索任务仍遵循工作记忆最小化原则。不同图形中颜色和形状都不同的注视时间最短,颜色不同和形状不同在注视时间上差异不显著,表明比较视觉搜索任务中特征维度数量比特征性质在引导注意上具有优先性。事先不规定搜索路径的情况下,被试主要采用系统搜索策略完成比较搜索任务。

关键词: 比较视觉搜索任务, 工作记忆最小化, 眼动

CLC Number:

B842.3

Su Juan, Bai Xuejun, Wang Chao, Yin Guo'en. Minimal Use of Working Memory in a Comparative Search for Feature Differences[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2017, 15(1): 49-53.

苏娟, 白学军, 王超, 阴国恩,. 比较视觉搜索任务中工作记忆最小化的眼动研究*[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2017, 15(1): 49-53.

References

1 张豹, 黄赛.(2013). 工作记忆表征对视觉注意的引导机制. 心理科学进展, 21(9), 1578-1584.
2 张豹, 黄赛, 候秋霞.(2014). 工作记忆表征捕获眼动中的颜色优先性. 心理学报, 46(1), 17-26.
3 Ballard, D. H., Hayhoe, M. M., Pook, P. K., & Rao, R. P. N.(1997). Deictic codes for the embodiment of cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20(5), 723-767.
4 Bauhoff, V., Huff, M., & Schwan S.(2011). The effect of temporal distance on comparative visual search. Journal of vision, 23(3), 1325-1333.
5 Bauhoff, V., Huff, M., & Schwan S.(2012). Distance matters: spatial contiguity effects as trade-off between gaze switches and memory load. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 863-871.
6 Drury, C.(1978). Integrating human factors models into statistical quality control. Human Factors, 20(5), 521-528.
7 Fournier, L. R., Eriksen, C. W., & Bowd, C.(1998). Multiple-feature discrimination faster than single-feature discrimination within the same object? Perception & Psychophysics, 60(8), 1384-1405.
8 Gajewski, D. A., & Henderson, J. M.(2005). Minimal use of working memory in a scene comparison task. Visual Congnition, 12(6), 979-1002.
9 Galpin, A. J., & Underwood, G.(2005). Eye movements during search and detection in comparative visual search. Peception & Psychophsice, 67(8), 1313-1331.
10 Hayhoe, M. M., Bensinger, D. G., & Ballard, D. H.(1998). Task constraints in visual working memory. Vision Research, 38(2), 125-137.
11 Hollingworth, A., & Henderson, J. M.(2002). Accurate visual memory for previously attended objects in natural scenes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 113-136.
12 Irwin, D. E.(1992). Memory for position and identity across eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 307-317.
13 Pomplun, M., Sichelschmidt, L., Wagner, K., Clermont, T., Rickheit, G., & Ritter, H.(2001). Comparative visual search: A difference that makes a difference. Cognitive Science, 25, 3-36.
14 Rayner, K., Pollatsek, A., Ashby. J., & Clifton, C. J.(Eds.),(2012). Psychology of reading.(pp. 9). Taylor & Francis Group: Psychology Press.
15 Soto, D., Heinke, D., Humphreys, G.W., & Blanco, M. J.(2005). Early, involuntary top-down guidance of attention from working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(2), 248-261.
16 Soto, D., Humphreys, G. W., & Heinke, D.(2006). Working memory can guide pop-out search. Vision Research, 46(6-7), 1010-1018.
17 Vera, B., Markus, H., & Stephan, S.(2015). The influence of expertise on comparative visual search performance. Annals of Leisure Research, 7, 1-3.
18 Vera, B., Markus, H., & Stephan, S.(2011). Effects of split attention revisited: A new display technology for troubleshooting tasks. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1254-1261.
19 Wang, J. H., Matthew H. S., Pavlo D. A., Chen, C., & Marc, P.(2016). Is reading impairment associated with enhanced holistic processing in comparative visual search? Dyslexia, 22, 345-361.

[1]	JIA Ning, RONG Lizhuo, DAI Jinghua. Effects of Social Cues on Explicit and Implicit Metacognitive Monitoring and Control [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(5): 593-599.
[2]	LI Shiyi, XIE Yanfeng, ZHAO Guang, BAI Xuejun. The Influence of Media Multitasking Experience on Implicit Memory in Different Attention Patterns [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(4): 433-440.
[3]	ZHANG Manman, HU Huilan, BIAN Han, LI Fang, ZHANG Zhichao, ZANG Chuanli. Word Frequency Effects in Fast and Slow Readers During Skilled Chinese Reading [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(3): 304-310.
[4]	HE Liyuan, ZHAO Xing, BAI Yu, LIU Nina. Multi-Word Unit Processing for Chinese Older Readers: Evidence from Eye Movements [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(2): 160-166.
[5]	QIN Zhao, WANG Yingchao, YE Jiaying, YUAN Xiaoyuan, YAN Guoli. Visual Compensation in Chinese Deaf Readers’ Sentence Reading: Evidence from Parafoveal-on-Foveal Effect [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(2): 167-173.
[6]	GU Junjuan, GAO Zhihua, MA Shaoyang. The Sub-Word Boundary Effect of Chinese Character Position Processing in Incremental Words [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(1): 1-7.
[7]	ZHAO Sainan, LI Lin, ZHANG Lijuan, WANG Jingxin. The Influence of Constrictive Context on the Processing of Unpredictable Word in Chinese Reading [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(6): 736-742.
[8]	LIU Lu, JIANG Yamei, ZHANG Qiaoming, LI Zhuyang. Influence of the Position and Transparency of Semantic Radicals on Semantic Activation in Chinese Phonogram Recognition [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(5): 585-591.
[9]	LI Sainan, YAN Guoli, WANG Yali, LIU Min, ZHAO Shuping. The Perceptual Span for Chinese Grade 1 Primary School Students [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(5): 606-611.
[10]	ZHANG Suyuan, LAN Zebo, ZHANG Shui, MENG Zhu, YAN Guoli. The Effects of Irrelevant Speech on Reading Among First Graders First-Grade Students: An Eye-Tracking Study [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(4): 433-438,446.
[11]	GAO Xiaolei, SHEN Meng, REN Xiaofei, BAI Xuejun, GAO Lei. The Perceptual Span and Parafoveal Preview Effect of Tibetan-Chinese Readers with High and Low Chinese Level in Reading Chinese [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(3): 297-303,333.
[12]	HE Fei, LIANG Feifei, BAI Xuejun. Semantic Radical Category Consistency Effect in Chinese Incidental Vocabulary Learning [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(3): 304-311.
[13]	KANG Lichao, LAN Zebo, HAN Yinghong. The Effect of Repeated Reading on the 4 to 5 Years Old Children’s Print Attention in Different Reading Styles [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(3): 368-374.
[14]	HE Liyuan, TIAN Xue, LI Yue, SHEN Fengdan, WANG Yongsheng, WU Jie. The Irrelevant Speech Effect on Reading in Older Adults: Evidence from Eye Movements [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(3): 375-381.
[15]	WU-REN Qimuge, ZHAO Aoxue, WANG Yuhan, ZHUANG Xiangling, MA Guojie. Visual Field Preference and Reference Strategy in Comparative Visual Search [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(2): 166-171.

Minimal Use of Working Memory in a Comparative Search for Feature Differences

比较视觉搜索任务中工作记忆最小化的眼动研究*

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments