TY - JOUR
T1 - Gestalt similarity groupings are not constructed in parallel
AU - Yu, Dian
AU - Tam, Derek
AU - Franconeri, Steven L.
N1 - Funding Information:
We thank Cathleen Moore, John Palmer, Satoru Suzuki, and Marcia Grabowecky for helpful discussion, and Jennifer Corbett, Justin Halberda, and an anonymous reviewer for valuable comments, and William Cook for assistance in data collection. This work was supported by IIS-1162067 and BCS-1056730.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018
PY - 2019/1
Y1 - 2019/1
N2 - Our visual system organizes spatially distinct areas with similar features into perceptual groups. To better understand the underlying mechanism of grouping, one route is to study its capacity and temporal progression. Intuitively, that capacity seems unlimited, and the temporal progression feels immediate. In contrast, here we show that in a visual search task that requires similarity grouping, search performance is consistent with serial processing of those groups. This was true across several experiments, for seeking a single ungrouped pair among grouped pairs, vice versa, and for displays with tiny spacings between the grouped items. In a control condition that ruled out display complexity confounds, when the small inter-object spacing was removed so that that pairs touched, removing the need to group by similarity, search became parallel. Why is similarity grouping so slow to develop? We argue that similarity grouping is ‘just’ feature selection - seeing a red, bright, or square group is global selection of those features. This account predicts serial processing of one feature group at a time, and makes new falsifiable predictions about how properties of feature-based selection should be reflected in similarity grouping.
AB - Our visual system organizes spatially distinct areas with similar features into perceptual groups. To better understand the underlying mechanism of grouping, one route is to study its capacity and temporal progression. Intuitively, that capacity seems unlimited, and the temporal progression feels immediate. In contrast, here we show that in a visual search task that requires similarity grouping, search performance is consistent with serial processing of those groups. This was true across several experiments, for seeking a single ungrouped pair among grouped pairs, vice versa, and for displays with tiny spacings between the grouped items. In a control condition that ruled out display complexity confounds, when the small inter-object spacing was removed so that that pairs touched, removing the need to group by similarity, search became parallel. Why is similarity grouping so slow to develop? We argue that similarity grouping is ‘just’ feature selection - seeing a red, bright, or square group is global selection of those features. This account predicts serial processing of one feature group at a time, and makes new falsifiable predictions about how properties of feature-based selection should be reflected in similarity grouping.
KW - Feature-based selection
KW - Grouping
KW - Perceptual organization
KW - Visual attention
KW - Visual search
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052919521&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85052919521&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.08.006
DO - 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.08.006
M3 - Article
C2 - 30212653
AN - SCOPUS:85052919521
SN - 0010-0277
VL - 182
SP - 8
EP - 13
JO - Cognition
JF - Cognition
ER -