title: Evidence against a speed limit in multiple-object tracking.
abstract: Everyday tasks often require us to keep track of multiple objects in dynamic scenes. Past studies show that tracking becomes more difficult as objects move faster. In the present study, we show that this trade-off may not be due to increased speed itself but may, instead, be due to the increased crowding that usually accompanies increases in speed. Here, we isolate changes in speed from variations in crowding, by projecting a tracking display either onto a small area at the center of a hemispheric projection dome or onto the entire dome. Use of the larger display increased retinal image size and object speed by a factor of 4 but did not increase interobject crowding. Results showed that tracking accuracy was equally good in the large-display condition, even when the objects traveled far into the visual periphery. Accuracy was also not reduced when we tested object speeds that limited performance in the small-display condition. These results, along with a reinterpretation of past studies, suggest that we might be able to track multiple moving objects as fast as we can a single moving object, once the effect of object crowding is eliminated.
authors.affiliation: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208, USA. franconeri@northwestern.edu
authors.forename: S L
authors.initials: SL
authors.lastname: Franconeri
authors.forename: J Y
authors.initials: JY
authors.lastname: Lin
authors.forename: Z W
authors.initials: ZW
authors.lastname: Pylyshyn
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Fisher
authors.forename: J T
authors.initials: JT
authors.lastname: Enns
mesh_terms: D000054:Acceleration; D001288:Attention; D003441:Crowding; D004193:Discrimination Learning; D005364:Field Dependence-Independence; D006801:Humans; D009039:Motion Perception; D009949:Orientation; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D011930:Reaction Time; D012858:Size Perception
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2005 Apr;31(2):235-47
references.pmid: 15826227
references.citation: Spat Vis. 1988;3(3):179-97
references.pmid: 3153671
references.citation: Cogn Psychol. 2001 Nov;43(3):171-216
references.pmid: 11689021
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2005 Aug;16(8):637-43
references.pmid: 16102067
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2008 Apr;15(2):390-7
references.pmid: 18488657
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Aug 14;104(33):13496-500
references.pmid: 17673552
references.citation: Vision Res. 1992 Jul;32(7):1349-57
references.pmid: 1455707
references.citation: Neuropsychologia. 1991;29(7):659-75
references.pmid: 1944868
references.citation: J Vis. 2004 Dec 30;4(12):1136-69
references.pmid: 15669917
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2005 Jul;9(7):349-54
references.pmid: 15953754
references.citation: Cognition. 2001 Jun;80(1-2):1-46
references.pmid: 11245838
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2007 Oct;33(5):1003-12
references.pmid: 17924803
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Jan 24;103(4):1053-8
references.pmid: 16410356
references.citation: J Vis. 2007 Oct 30;7(13):14.1-10
references.pmid: 17997642