Abstract
When processing global and local aspects of compound visual figures, a robust finding is that global targets are detected faster and more accurately than local targets. Moreover, unidirectional interference is often observed. Despite the convincing evidence that global information and local information are available together, when attention is focused on the global level, items from the local level often have very little, if any, effect on behavior. If local information is available with global information, then why is global dominance so often observed under such a wide range of conditions? This paper is concerned with the fate of the ignored, and apparently ineffective, local distractors. In our experiments, at least one critical factor was stimulus-response (S-R) mapping. We compared a consistent S-R task, which facilitated a speed advantage for global, with a variable S-R task, which required a higher degree of semantic analysis for each stimulus. The two tasks produced large differences in behavior, showing unidirectional interference in the consistent S-R task, and strong bidirectional interference in the variable S-R task. Thus, the identity of ignored local distractors was available, even under conditions that favored focused attention to global information. The results provide support for a model in which global processing proceeds more quickly at early perceptual stages and in which local processing can catch up if processing demands are increased at later stages.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Blanca, M. J., Zalabardo, C., Garcia-Criado, F., &Siles, R. (1994). Hemispheric differences in global and local processing dependent on exposure duration.Neuropsychologia,32, 1343–1351.
Boer, L. C., &Keuss, P. J. G. (1982). Global precedence as a postperceptual effect: An analysis of speed-accuracy tradeoff functions.Perception & Psychophysics,31, 358–366.
Breitmeyer, B. G. (1975). Simple reaction time as a measure of the temporal response properties of transient and sustained channels.Vision Research,15, 1411–1412.
Briand, K. A. (1993). Efficient filtering of irrelevant global and local information when target level and location are random.Psychological Research,55, 264–269.
Briand, K. A. (1994). Selective attention to global and local structure of objects: Alternative measures of nontarget processing.Perception & Psychophysics,55, 562–574.
Delis, D. C., Robertson, L. C., &Efron, R. (1986). Hemispheric specialization of memory for visual hierarchical stimuli.Neuropsychologia,24, 205–214.
De Valois, R. L., &De Valois, K. K. (1988).Spatial vision. New York: Oxford University Press.
Duncan, J. (1981). Directing attention in the visual field.Perception & Psychophysics,30, 90–93.
Evans, M. A., Shedden, J. M., Hevenor, S. J., &Hahn, M. C. (2000). Parallel processing of local and global aspects of hierarchical stimuli: Evidence for lateralization at early stages of processing.Neuropsychologia,38, 225–239.
Fink, G. R., Halligan, P. W., Marshall, J. C., Frith, C. D., Frackowiak, R. S. J., &Dolan, R. J. (1996). Where in the brain does visual attention select the forest and the trees?Nature,382, 626–628.
Fink, G. R., Marshall, J. C., Halligan, P. W., Frith, C. D., Frackowiak, R. S. J., &Dolan, R. J. (1997). Hemispheric specialization for global and local processing: The effect of stimulus category.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London,264, 487–494.
Grice, G. R., Canham, L., &Boroughs, J. M. (1983). Forest before trees? It depends where you look.Perception & Psychophysics,33, 121–128.
Heinze, H.-J., Hinrichs, H., Scholz, M., Burchert, W., &Mangun, G. R. (1998). Neural mechanisms of global and local processing: A combined PET and ERP study.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,10, 485–498.
Heinze, H.-J., &Munte, T. F. (1993). Electrophysiological correlates of hierarchical stimulus processing: Dissociation between onset and later stages of global and local target processing.Neuropsychologia,31, 841–852.
Hoeger, R. (1997). Speed of processing and stimulus complexity in lowfrequency and high-frequency channels.Perception,26, 1039–1045.
Hoffman, J. E. (1980). Interaction between global and local levels of a form.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,6, 222–234.
Hubel, D. H., &Wiesel, T. N. (1959). Receptive fields of single neurones in the cat’s striate cortex.Journal of Physiology,148, 574–591.
Hubel, D. H., Wiesel, T. N., &Stryker, M. P. (1977). Orientation columns in macaque monkey visual cortex demonstrated by the 2-deoxyglucose autoradiographic technique.Nature,269, 328–330.
Hübner, R. (1997). The effect of spatial frequency on global precedence and hemispheric differences.Perception & Psychophysics,59, 187–201.
Hughes, H. C., Fendrich, R., &Reuter-Lorenz, P. A. (1990). Global versus local processing in the absence of low spatial frequencies.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,2, 272–282.
Hughes, H. C., Layton, W. M., Baird, J. C., &Lester, L. S. (1984). Global precedence in visual pattern recognition.Perception & Psychophysics,35, 361–371.
Hughes, H. C., Nozawa, G., &Kitterle, F. (1996). Global precedence, spatial frequency channels, and the statistics of natural images.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,8, 197–230.
Kimchi, R. (1992). Primacy of wholistic processing and global/local paradigm: A critical review.Psychological Bulletin,112, 24–38.
Kimchi, R., &Merhav, I. (1991). Hemispheric processing of global form, local form, and texture.Acta Psychologica,76, 133–147.
Kinchla, R. A., &Wolfe, J. M. (1979). The order of visual processing: “Top-down,” “bottom-up,” or “middle-out”.Perception & Psychophysics,25, 225–231.
Klein, R. M., &Barresi, J. (1985). Perceptual salience of form versus material as a function of variations in spacing and number of elements.Perception & Psychophysics,37, 440–446.
Lamb, M. R., &Robertson, L. C. (1988). The processing of hierarchical stimuli: Effects of retinal locus, locational uncertainty, and stimulus identity.Perception & Psychophysics,44, 172–181.
Lamb, M. R., &Robertson, L. C. (1989). Do response time advantage and interference reflect the order of processing of global- and locallevel information?Perception & Psychophysics,46, 254–258.
Lamb, M. R., &Robertson, L. C. (1990). The effect of visual angle on global and local reaction times depends on the set of visual angles presented.Perception & Psychophysics,47, 489–496.
Lamb, M. R., Robertson, L. C., &Knight, R. T. (1989). Attention and interference in the processing of global and local information: Effects of unilateral temporal-parietal junction lesions.Neuropsychologia,27, 471–483.
Lamb, M. R., &Yund, E. W. (1993). The role of spatial frequency in the processing of hierarchically organized stimuli.Perception & Psychophysics,54, 773–784.
Lamb, M. R., Yund, E. W., &Pond, H. M. (1999). Is attentional selection to different levels of hierarchical structure based on spatial frequency?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,128, 88–94.
Livingstone, M. S., &Hubel, D. H. (1987). Psychophysical evidence for separate channels for the perception of form, color, movement, and depth.Journal of Neuroscience,7, 3416–3468.
Logan, G. D., &Stadler, M. A. (1991). Mechanisms of performance improvement in consistent mapping memory search: Automaticity or strategy shift?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 478–496.
Martin, M. (1979). Local and global processing: The role of sparsity.Memory & Cognition,7, 476–484.
May, J. G., Gutierrez, C., &Harsin, C. A. (1995). The time-course of global precedence and consistency effects.International Journal of Neuroscience,80, 237–245.
Melara, R. D., &Mounts, J. R. W. (1993). Selective attention to Stroop dimensions: Effects of baseline discriminability, response mode, and practice.Memory & Cognition,21, 627–645.
Michimata, C., Okubo, M., &Mugishima, Y. (1999). Effects of background color on the global and local processing of hierarchically organized stimuli.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,11, 1–8.
Miller, J. (1981). Global precedence in attention and decision.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,7, 1161–1174.
Navon, D. (1977). Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception.Cognitive Psychology,9, 353–383.
Navon, D. (1981). The forest revisited: More on global precedence.Psychological Research,43, 1–32.
Paquet, L. (1992). Global and local processing in nonattended objects: A failure to induce local processing dominance.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 512–529.
Paquet, L., &Merikle, P. M. (1984). Global precedence: The effect of exposure duration.Canadian Journal of Psychology,38, 45–53.
Paquet, L., &Merikle, P. M. (1988). Global precedence in attended and nonattended objects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,14, 89–100.
Parker, D. M., Lishman, J. R., &Hughes, J. (1996). Role of coarse and fine spatial information in face and object processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,22, 1448–1466.
Pomerantz, J. R. (1983). Global and local precedence: Selective attention in form and motion perception.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,112, 516–540.
Robertson, L. C., &Delis, D. C. (1986). “Part-whole” processing in unilateral brain-damaged patients: Dysfunction of hierarchical organization.Neuropsychologia,24, 363–370.
Robertson, L. C., &Lamb, M. R. (1991). Neuropsychological contribution to theories of part /whole organization.Cognitive Psychology,23, 299–330.
Robertson, L. C., Lamb, M. R., &Knight, R. T. (1988). Effects of lesions of temporal-parietal junction on perception and attention processing in humans.Journal of Neuroscience,8, 3757–3769.
Robertson, L. C., Lamb, M. R., &Zaidel, E. (1993). Interhemispheric relations in processing hierarchical patterns: Evidence from normal and commissurotomized patients.Neuropsychology,7, 325–342.
Schneider, W., &Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention.Psychological Review,84, 1–66.
Shedden, J. M., Marsman, I. A., & Paul, M. P. (2001).Global/local attention switching: Effects of hemisphere bias and level repetition. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Shiffrin, R. M., &Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory.Psychological Review,84, 127–190.
Shulman, G. L., Sullivan, M. A., Gish, K., &Sakoda, W. J. (1986). The role of spatial-frequency channels in the perception of local and global structure.Perception,15, 259–273.
Shulman, G. L., &Wilson, J. (1987). Spatial frequency and selective attention to local and global information.Perception,16, 89–101.
Van der Heijden, A. H. C. (1981).Short-term visual information forgetting. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Van der Heijden, A. H. C., Hagenaar, R., &Bloem, W. (1984). Two stages in postcategorical filtering and selection.Memory & Cognition,12, 458–469.
Ward, L. M. (1982). Determinants of attention of local and global features of visual forms.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,8, 562–581.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Grant OGP0170353 to J.M.S.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shedden, J.M., Reid, G.S. A variable mapping task produces symmetrical interference between global information and local information. Perception & Psychophysics 63, 241–252 (2001). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194465
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194465