Search

In a contextual cuing paradigm, we examined how memory for the spatial structure of a natural scene guides visual search. Participants searched through arrays of objects that were embedded within depictions of real-world scenes. If a repeated search array was associated with a single scene during study, then array repetition produced significant contextual cuing. However, expression of that learning was dependent on instantiating the original scene in which the learning occurred: Contextual cuing was disrupted when the repeated array was transferred to a different scene. Such scene-specific learning was not absolute, however. Under conditions of high scene variability, repeated search array were learned independently of the scene background. These data suggest that when a consistent environmental structure is available, spatial representations supporting visual search are organized hierarchically, with memory for functional subregions of an environment nested within a representation of the larger scene. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How rapidly does boundary extension occur? Across experiments, trials included a 3-scene sequence (325 ms/picture), masked interval, and repetition of 1 scene. The repetition was the same view or differed (more close-up or wide angle). Observers rated the repetition as same as, closer than, or more wide angle than the original view on a 5-point scale. Masked intervals were 100, 250, 625, or 1,000 ms in Experiment 1 and 42, 100, or 250 ms in Experiments 2 and 3. Boundary extension occurred in all cases: Identical views were rated as too "close-up," and distractor views elicited the rating asymmetry typical of boundary extension (wider angle distractors were rated as being more similar to the original than were closer up distractors). Most important, boundary extension was evident when only a 42-ms mask separated the original and test views. Experiments 1 and 3 included conditions eliciting a gaze shift prior to the rating test; this did not eliminate boundary extension. Results show that boundary extension is available soon enough and is robust enough to play an on-line role in view integration, perhaps supporting incorporation of views within a larger spatial framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]