Sent to you by Frouke via Google Reader:
via ScienceDirect Publication: Vision Research on 2/18/11
Publication year: 2011Source: Vision Research, In Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available online 18 February 2011
Todd S., Horowitz , Yoana, Kuzmova
The evidence is mixed as to whether the visual system treats objects and holes differently. We used a multiple object tracking task to test the hypothesis that figural objects are easier to track than holes. Observers tracked four of eight items (holes or objects). We used an adaptive algorithm to estimate the speed allowing 75% tracking accuracy. In Experiments 1-5, the distinction between holes and figures was accomplished by pictorial cues, while red-cyan anaglyphs were used to provide the illusion of depth in Experiment 6. We variously used Gaussian pixel noise, photographic scenes, or synthetic textures as backgrounds. Tracking was...
Research highlights: ► Multiple object tracking as a way to measure how the visual system parses a scene. ► Tracking was more difficult with a complex background, than a blank background. ► Tracking was easier when disks carried fixed, unique markings. ► Tracking holes was no more difficult than tracking figures. ► Suggests that proto-objects can be regions which lack an image-based border.
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to ScienceDirect Publication: Vision Research using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten