Familiarity and visual change detection

By Harold Pashler. 1988

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Neuroscience

Citations in the corpus

Do Image Classifiers Generalize Across Time? (2019, background): “Second, we present only a single pair of frames at a time to reviewers because presenting videos or groups of frames could cause them to miss large changes due to the phenomenon of change blindness [22].”
A Boolean map theory of visual attention. (2007, background): “We have shown that Boolean map theory provides a unified framework in which to view target–target competition (Duncan, 1980a, 1980b), feature integration (Treisman & Gelade, 1980), object-based attention (Duncan, 1984), and change blindness (Pashler, 1988b; Rensink, 2000a, 2000b).”
Feature-based memory-driven attentional capture: visual working memory content affects visual attention. (2006, unknown): “In terms of capacity, it has been proposed that observers can typically attend to, track, tag, enumerate, and retain a maximum of around four items simultaneously in both attention and working memory tasks (Alvarez & Cavanagh, 2004; Burkell & Pylyshyn, 1997; Cowan, 2000; Luck & Vogel, 1997; Mandler ”
Modeling the influence of task on attention. (2005, methodology): “But several studies have shown that there exist strict limitations ($4) on how many object files may coexist at any given time (Irwin, 1992a; Irwin & Zelinsky, 2002; Luck & Vogel, 1997; Pashler, 1988; Sperling, 1960).”
Consequences of the Now-or-Never bottleneck for signed versus spoken languages (2015, background): “Similarly, and of relevance for the perception of sign language, studies of visual change detection suggest that the ability to maintain visual information beyond 60–70 ms is very limited (Pashler 1988).”
Visual working memory for simple and complex visual stimuli (2005, unknown): “A similar logic for computing VWM capacity was used in Pashler (1988).”
Visual memory for natural scenes: Evidence from change detection and visual search (2006, background): “It has a limited capacity of 3 4 objects (Irwin, 1992a; Luck & Vogel, 1997; Pashler, 1988) and less spatial precision than point-by-point sensory persistence (Irwin, 1991; Phillips, 1974).”
The precision of visual working memory is set by allocation of a shared resource (2009, methodology): “A long-standing model of visual working memory holds that three or four independent memory “slots” each store information about a single visual item (Cowan, 2005; Luck & Vogel, 1997; Pashler, 1988; Vogel, Woodman, & Luck, 2001).”
The mechanisms of working memory capacity: Primary memory, secondary memory, and attention control (2014, methodology): “Taking these assumptions into account , statistical corrections allow researchers to estimate a person's storage capacity, independent of the number of objects contained within an array (Cowan et al., 2005; Pashler , 1988; Rouder et al., 2011; see Methods).”
Capacity limits of information processing in the brain. (2005, methodology): “Both studies used the change detection paradigm [29, 30 ], in which participants detect if there is a change in object identity and/or location between two briefly presented visual arrays separated by a short retention interval (Figure 2a).”
Change Detection Without Awareness: Do Explicit Reports Underestimate the Representation of Change in the Visual System? (2000, methodology): “Diego Fernandez-Duque”
Change Blindness Blindness: The Metacognitive Error of Overestimating Change-detection Ability (2000, background): “Subjects miss the appearance and disappearance of parts of natural and artificial scenes, they are oblivious to changes to the central objects in movies, and they even miss the substitution of one conversation partner for another (e.g. Blackmore, Brelstaff, Nelson, & Troscianko, 1995; Grimes, 1996; ”
Detecting Changes in Novel, Complex Three-dimensional Objects (2000, methodology): “Experiments using the “flicker” paradigm (Rensink et al., 1997) or simple sequential matching tasks (Pashler, 1988; Simons, 1996) have employed static objects or scenes that abruptly disappear and reappear, while other studies have employed motion pictures in which changes occur during a cut (Levin…”
Non-commercial Research and Educational Use including without Limitation Use in Instruction at Your Institution, Sending It to Specific Colleagues That You Know, and Providing a Copy to Your Institution's Administrator. All Other Uses, Reproduction and Distribution, including without Limitation Comm (2005, unknown): “All these methods require considerable A u t h o r ' s p e r s o n a l”
An eye movement analysis of multiple object tracking in a realistic environment (2008, methodology): “We also computed Pashler (1988) ks for the Track 4 observers who could be clearly classified as either target-trackers or centroid-trackers, and found capacity estimates of 1.”
Attenuated Change Blindness for Exogenously Attended Items in a Flicker Paradigm (2000, unknown): “Pashler, 1988b; Phillips, 1974; cf. Simons, 1996).”
Contextual cueing: implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention. (1998, background): “But only a small subset of this information is available to conscious awareness or working memory at any given moment (Luck & Vogel, 1997; Pashler, 1988; Rensink, O’Regan, & Clark, 1997; Simons & Levin, 1997; Sperling, 1960).”