Symmetry: modeling the effects of masking noise, axial cueing and salience.
Symmetry detection is an interesting probe of pattern processing because it requires the matching of novel patterns without the benefit of prior recognition. However, there is evidence that prior knowledge of the axis location plays an important role in symmetry detection. We investigated how the prior information about the symmetry axis affects symmetry detection under noise-masking conditions. The target stimuli were random-dot displays structured to be symmetric about vertical, horizontal, or diagonal axes and viewed through eight apertures (1.2 degrees diameter) evenly distributed around a 6 degrees diameter circle. The information about axis orientation was manipulated by (1) cueing of axis orientation before the trial and (2) varying axis salience by including or excluding the axis region within the noise apertures. The percentage of correct detection of the symmetry was measured at for a range of both target and masking noise densities. The threshold vs. noise density function was flat at low noise density and increased with a slope of 0.75-0.8 beyond a critical density. Axis cueing reduced the target threshold 2-4 fold at all noise densities while axis salience had an effect only at high noise density. Our results are inconsistent with an ideal observer or signal-to-noise account of symmetry detection but can be explained by a multiple-channel model is which the response in each channel is the ratio between the nonlinear transform of the responses of sets of early symmetry detectors and the sum of external and intrinsic sources of noise.
Chen
Chien-Chung
CC
Department of Psychology, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. c3chen@ntu.edu.tw
Tyler
Christopher W
CW
D003463:Cues; D006801:Humans; D009622:Noise; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D010470:Perceptual Masking
Spat Vis. 1995;9(1):9-32
7626549
Psychol Rev. 1996 Jul;103(3):429-56
8759043
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1993 Apr;19(2):364-80
8473845
Proc Biol Sci. 2003 Aug 22;270(1525):1727-33
12965001
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1975 Aug;1(3):221-30
1202144
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1983 Apr;9(2):258-69
6221070
Vision Res. 1998 May;38(9):1183-98
9666987
Vision Res. 1997 Oct;37(20):2915-30
9415370
Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):433-6
9176952
Spat Vis. 1994;8(4):393-413
7772547
Vision Res. 2002 Feb;42(3):351-67
11809487
Vision Res. 1978;18(7):815-25
676089
Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):479-84
9176958
Vision Res. 1979;19(7):783-93
483597
Psychol Rev. 2008 Jan;115(1):44-82
18211184
Q J Exp Psychol A. 2000 Feb;53(1):165-90
10718069
Spat Vis. 1995;9(1):33-55
7626546
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2004 Nov;117(3):233-50
15500805
Neuroreport. 2000 Jul 14;11(10):2133-8
10923658
Vision Res. 1999 Nov;39(23):3855-72
10748921
J Vis. 2005 Dec 16;5(10):888-900
16441192
Proc Biol Sci. 1998 Apr 22;265(1397):659-64
9608727
Vision Res. 1998 Dec;38(23):3795-803
9893808
Vis Neurosci. 1992 Nov;9(5):427-43
1450099
Nature. 1994 Nov 10;372(6502):172-5
7969449
J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 1999 Sep;16(9):2112-23
10474892
Spat Vis. 1994;8(4):443-53
7772550
Kybernetik. 1974;16(2):65-7
4453110
Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Mar 7;268(1466):509-16
11296863
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2004 May;116(1):75-91
15111231
Percept Mot Skills. 1977 Dec;45(3 Pt 2):1267-73
604912
Psychol Rep. 1991 Feb;68(1):51-60
2034778
J Opt Soc Am A. 1985 Sep;2(9):1508-32
4045584
Vision Res. 2000;40(22):3121-44
10996616
Spat Vis. 1995;9(1):79-100
7626548
Vision Res. 2000;40(19):2621-44
10958913
J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 1994 Jun;11(6):1710-9
8046537
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1990 Feb;16(1):150-63
2137516
Nature. 1996 Aug 1;382(6590):458-61
18610516
J Vis. 2010 Mar 25;10(3):8.1-14
20377285