title: Searching Through the Hierarchy: How Level of Target Categorization Affects Visual Search.
abstract: Does the same basic-level advantage commonly observed in the categorization literature also hold for targets in a search task? We answered this question by first conducting a category verification task to define a set of categories showing a standard basic-level advantage, which we then used as stimuli in a search experiment. Participants were cued with a picture preview of the target or its category name at either superordinate, basic, or subordinate levels, then shown a target-present/absent search display. Although search guidance and target verification was best using pictorial cues, the effectiveness of the categorical cues depended on the hierarchical level. Search guidance was best for the specific subordinate level cues, while target verification showed a standard basic-level advantage. These findings demonstrate different hierarchical advantages for guidance and verification in categorical search. We interpret these results as evidence for a common target representation underlying categorical search guidance and verification.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, Stony Brook University.
authors.forename: Justin T
authors.initials: JT
authors.lastname: Maxfield
authors.forename: Gregory J
authors.initials: GJ
authors.lastname: Zelinsky
keywords: Basic-level advantage; Categorical search; Category verification; Eye movements; Search guidance
references.citation: Perception. 2007;36(8):1123-38
references.pmid: 17972478
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2009 Oct;62(10):1904-14
references.pmid: 19459137
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 1997 Sep;126(3):248-77
references.pmid: 9281832
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Learn. 1980 Mar;6(2):174-215
references.pmid: 7373248
references.citation: Vision Res. 2011 Mar 25;51(6):535-45
references.pmid: 21295053
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1985 Jan;11(1):70-84
references.pmid: 3156953
references.citation: Vision Res. 2006 Nov;46(24):4118-33
references.pmid: 17005231
references.citation: Vision Res. 2004 Jun;44(12):1411-26
references.pmid: 15066400
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2008 Aug;15(4):795-801
references.pmid: 18792506
references.citation: Front Psychol. 2011 Jul 15;2:165
references.pmid: 21811480
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2005 Nov;134(4):443-60
references.pmid: 16316285
references.citation: Vision Res. 2009 Jul;49(16):2095-103
references.pmid: 19500615
references.citation: J Vis. 2009 Oct 06;9(11):8.1-13
references.pmid: 20053071