Abstract
The attentional theory of spatial enumeration (Trick & Pylyshyn, 1994) predicts that subitizing, the rapid process (40–120 msec/item) used to enumerate 1–4 items, employs the same mechanism that permits individuals to track 4–5 moving items simultaneously, whereas enumerating more items requires moving attentional focus from area to area in the display. To test this theory, enumeration of static and moving items was investigated in 8-, 10-, 12-, and 20-year-old participants using a number discrimination task. As was predicted, random independent item motion did not substantially impede enumeration of 1–4 items regardless of age. However, even movement within a 1.14° square area slowed enumeration of 6–9 items, although on average the interference decreased with age from 788 msec for the 8-year-olds to 136 msec for the 20-year-olds. The relevance of this finding for theories of enumeration, multiple-object tracking, visual working memory, and object-based attention is discussed.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Chi, M. T., &Klahr, D. (1975). Span and rate of apprehension in children and adults.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,19, 434–439.
Christ, S. E., McCrae, C. S., &Abrams, R. A. (2002). Inhibition of return in static and dynamic displays.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,9, 80–85.
Folk, C. L., Egeth, H., &Kwak, H.-W. (1988). Subitizing: Direct apprehension or serial processing?Perception & Psychophysics,44, 313–320.
Gallistel, C. R., &Gelman, R. (1992). Preverbal and verbal counting and computation.Cognition,44, 43–74.
Jevons, W. (1871). The power of numerical discrimination.Nature,3, 281–282.
Jiang, Y., Chun, M., &Marks, L. (2002a). Visual marking: Dissociating effects of new and old set size.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 293–302.
Jiang, Y., Chun, M., &Marks, L. (2002b). Visual marking: Selective attention to asynchronous temporal groups.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,28, 717–730.
Kaye, B., &Ruskin, E. (1990). The development of attentional control mechanisms. In J. T. Enns (Ed.),The development of attention: Research and theory (pp. 227–244). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Klahr, D., &Wallace, J. G. (1976).Cognitive development: An information processing view. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Klein, R.M., &MacInnes, W. J. (1999). Inhibition of return is a foraging facilitator in visual search.Psychological Science,10, 346–352.
Liss, P., &Reeves, A. (1983). Interruption of dot processing by a backward mask.Perception,12, 513–529.
Mandler, G., &Shebo, B. J. (1982). Subitizing: An analysis of its component processes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,111, 1–22.
McCrae, C. S., &Abrams, R. A. (2001). Age-related differences in object- and location-based inhibition of return of attention.Psychology & Aging,16, 437–449.
Oyama, T., Kikuchi, T., &Ichihara, S. (1981). Span of attention, backward masking, and reaction time.Perception & Psychophysics,29, 106–112.
Pylyshyn, Z. W. (2001). Visual indexes, preconceptual objects, and situated vision.Cognition,80, 127–158.
Pylyshyn, Z. W., Elcock, E. W., Marmor, M., & Sander, P. (1978). Explorations in visual-motor spaces. InProceedings of the Second International Conference of the Canadian Society for the Computational Studies of Intelligence. University of Toronto.
Pylyshyn, Z. W., &Storm, R. W. (1988). Tracking multiple independent targets: Evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism.Spatial Vision,3, 179–197.
Sagi, D., &Julesz, B. (1984). Detection versus discrimination of visual orientation.Perception,13, 619–628.
Sathian, K., Simon, T. J., Peterson, S., Patel, G. A., Hoffman, J.M., &Grafton, T. S. (1999). Neural evidence linking visual object enumeration and attention.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,11, 36–51.
Sears, C. R., &Pylyshyn, Z. W. (2000). Multiple-object tracking and attentional processing.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,54, 1–14.
Snyder, J. J., &Kingstone, A. (2000). Inhibition of return and visual search: How many separate loci are inhibited?Perception & Psychophysics,62, 452–458.
Starkey, P., &Cooper, R. (1995). The development of subitizing in young children.British Journal of Developmental Psychology,13, 399–420.
Tipper, S. P., Jordan, H., &Weaver, B. (1999). Scene-based and object-centered inhibition of return: Evidence for dual orienting mechanisms.Perception & Psychophysics,61, 50–60.
Tipper, S. P., Rafal, R., Reuter-Lorenz, P.A., Starrveldt, Y., Ro, T., Egly, R., Danziger, S., &Weaver, B. (1997). Object-based facilitation and inhibition from visual orienting in the human split-brain.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,23, 1522–1532.
Tipper, S. P., Weaver, B., Jerreat, L., &Burak, A. (1994). Objectand environment-based inhibition of return in visual attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 478–499.
Trick, L.M. (2003, June).Age-related changes in the effect of response uncertainty. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Society of Brain, Behaviour, and Cognitive Science, Hamilton, Ontario.
Trick, L.M., Dales, L., & Audet, D. (2002, June). Enumerating items as they move: Item individuation and tracking. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Society of Brain, Behaviour, and Cognitive Science, Vancouver.
Trick, L.M., &Enns, J. T. (1998). Life-span changes in attention: The visual search task.Cognitive Development,13, 369–386.
Trick, L.M., Enns, J. T., &Brodeur, D. A. (1996). Lifespan changes in visual enumeration: The number discrimination task.Developmental Psychology,32, 925–932.
Trick, L.M., &Pylyshyn, Z. P. (1994). Why are small and large numbers enumerated differently? A limited capacity preattentive stage in vision.Psychological Review,101, 80–102.
Tuholski, S. W., Engle, R.W., &Baylis, G.C. (2001). Individual differences in working memory capacity and enumeration.Memory & Cognition,29, 484–492.
Ullman, S. (1984). Visual routines.Cognition,18(1–3), 97–159.
van Oeffelen, M. P., &Vos, P. G. (1982). Configurational effects on the enumeration of dots: Counting by groups.Memory & Cognition,10, 396–404.
Watson, D. G. (2001). Visual marking in moving displays: Featurebased inhibition is not necessary.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 74–84.
Watson, D. G., &Humphreys, G. W. (1997). Visual marking: Prioritizing selection for new objects by top-down attentional inhibition of old objects.Psychological Review,104, 90–122.
Watson, D. G., &Humphreys, G. W. (2000). Visual marking: Evidence for inhibition using a probe-dot detection paradigm.Perception & Psychophysics,62, 471–481.
Watson, D. G., &Maylor, E. A. (2002). Aging and visual marking: Selective deficits for moving stimuli.Psychology & Aging,17, 321–339.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was funded by a grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and was based on D.A.’s honors thesis and L.D.’s Advanced Special Topics research project.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Trick, L.M., Audet, D. & Dales, L. Age differences in enumerating things that move: Implications for the development of multiple-object tracking. Memory & Cognition 31, 1229–1237 (2003). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195806
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195806