Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Feb 1:54:20-30.
doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2011.12.004. Epub 2012 Jan 2.

Effects of part-based similarity on visual search: the Frankenbear experiment

Affiliations

Effects of part-based similarity on visual search: the Frankenbear experiment

Robert G Alexander et al. Vision Res. .

Abstract

Do the target-distractor and distractor-distractor similarity relationships known to exist for simple stimuli extend to real-world objects, and are these effects expressed in search guidance or target verification? Parts of photorealistic distractors were replaced with target parts to create four levels of target-distractor similarity under heterogenous and homogenous conditions. We found that increasing target-distractor similarity and decreasing distractor-distractor similarity impaired search guidance and target verification, but that target-distractor similarity and heterogeneity/homogeneity interacted only in measures of guidance; distractor homogeneity lessens effects of target-distractor similarity by causing gaze to fixate the target sooner, not by speeding target detection following its fixation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Examples of target and distractor teddy bears from each T-D similarity condition. 0-part, 1-part, 2-part, and 3-part refer to the number of parts from a distractor that were matched to the target.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Representative examples of 0-part similarity search displays in (A) Experiment 1 (heterogenous distractors) and (B) Experiment 2 (homogenous distractors).
Figure 3
Figure 3
The procedure for a representative 3-part target absent trial in Experiment 1.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Time-to-target (A) and target verification time (B) for correct target present trials in Experiments 1 and 2. Error bars show 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Percentage of trials in which the target was the first object fixated in Experiments 1 and 2. Error bars show 95% confidence intervals. The dashed line indicates chance.

References

    1. Alexander RG, Zelinsky GJ. Visual Similarity Effects in Categorical Search. Journal of Vision. 2011;11(8):9, 1–15. doi: 10.1167/11.8.9. http://www.journalofvision.org/content/11/8/9. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ashby FG, Perrin NA. Toward a unified theory of similarity and recognition. Psychological Review. 1988;95:124–150.
    1. Becker MW, Pashler H, Lubin J. Object-Intrinsic oddities draw early saccades. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 2007;33:20–30. - PubMed
    1. Becker SI, Ansorge U, Horstmann G. Can intertrial priming account for the similarity effect in visual search? Vision Research. 2009;49(14):1738–1756. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2009.04.001. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Blanchette I, Dunbar K. How analogies are generated: The roles of structural and superficial similarity. Memory & Cognition. 2000;28(1):108–124. - PubMed

Publication types