Abstract
In visual search tasks, observers look for a target stimulus among distractor stimuli. A visual search asymmetry is said to occur when a search for stimulus A among stimulus B produces different results from a search for B among A. Anne Treisman made search asymmetries into an important tool in the study of visual attention. She argued that it was easier to find a target that was defined by the presence of a preattentive basic feature than to find a target defined by the absence of that feature. Four of the eight papers in this symposium inPerception & Psychophysics deal with the use of search asymmetries to identify stimulus attributes that behave as basic features in this context. Another two papers deal with the long-standing question of whether a novelty can be considered to be a basic feature. Asymmetries can also arise when one type of stimulus is easier to identify or classify than another. Levin and Angelone’s paper on visual search for faces of different races is an examination of an asymmetry of this variety. Finally, Previc and Naegele investigate an asymmetry based on the spatial location of the target. Taken as a whole, these papers illustrate the continuing value of the search asymmetry paradigm.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bergen, J. R., &Julesz, B. (1983). Rapid discrimination of visual patterns.IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, & Cybernetics,SMC-13, 857–863.
Boutsen, L., &Marendaz, C. (2001). Detection of shape orientation depends on salient axes of symmetry and elongation: Evidence from visual search.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 404–422.
Caelli, T., Julesz, B., &Gilbert, E. (1978). On perceptual analyzers underlying texture discrimination.Biological Cybernetics,29, 201–214.
Deutsch, J. A., &Deutsch, D. (1963). Attention: Some theoretical considerations.Psychological Review,70, 80–90.
Duncan, J., &Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity.Psychological Review,96, 433–458.
Egeth, H. E., Virzi, R. A., &Garbart, H. (1984). Searching for conjunctively defined targets.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 32–39.
Enns, J. T., &Rensink, R. A. (1990). Sensitivity to three-dimensional orientation in visual search.Psychological Science,1, 323–326.
Enns, J. T., &Rensink, R. A. (1991). Preattentive recovery of threedimensional orientation from line drawings.Psychological Review,98, 335–351.
Flowers, J. H., &Lohr, D. J. (1985). How does familiarity affect visual search for letter strings?Perception & Psychophysics,37, 557–567.
Foster, D. H., &Ward, P A. (1991). Asymmetries in oriented-line detection indicate two orthogonal filters in early vision.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Series B,243, 75–81.
Frith, U. (1974). A curious effect with reversed letters explained by a theory of schema.Perception & Psychophysics,16, 113–116.
Hawley, K. J., Johnston, W. A., &Farnham, J. M. (1994). Novel popout with nonsense strings: Effects of predictability of string length and spatial location.Perception & Psychophysics,55, 261–268.
He, S., Cavanagh, P., &Intriligator, J. (1996). Attentional resolution and the locus of visual awareness.Nature,383, 334–337.
Johnston, W. A., Hawley, K. J., &Farnham, J. M. (1993). Novel popout: Empirical boundaries and tentative theory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 140–153.
Julesz, B., Gilbert, E. N., Shepp, L. A., &Frisch, H. L. (1973). Inability of humans to discriminate between visual textures that agree in second-order statistics—revisited.Perception,2, 391–405.
Klein, R. (1988). Inhibitory tagging system facilitates visual search.Nature,334, 430–431.
Kristjánsson, Á., &Tse, P. U. (2001). Curvature discontinuities are cues for rapid shape analysis.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 390–403.
Kwak, H.-W., Dagenbach, D., &Egeth, H. (1991). Further evidence for a time-independent shift of the focus of attention.Perception & Psychophysics,49, 473–480.
Levin, D. T. (1996). Classifying faces by race: The structure of face categories.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,22, 1364–1382.
Levin, D. T., &Angelone, B. L. (2001). Visual search for a socially defined feature: What causes the search asymmetry favoring cross-race faces?Perception & Psychophysics,63, 423–435.
Malinowski, P., &Hübner, R. (2001). The effect of familiarity on visual-search performance: Evidence for learned basic features.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 458–463.
Moraglia, G. (1989). Display organization and the detection of horizontal line segments.Perception & Psychophysics,45, 265–272.
Neisser, U. (1967).Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton, Century, Crofts.
Nothdurft, H. C. (1993). Faces and facial expression do not pop-out.Perception,22, 1287–1298.
Pashler, H. (1997).The psychology of attention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Previc, F. H. (1996). Attentional and oculomotor influences on visual field anisotropies in visual search performance.Visual Cognition,3, 277–301.
Previc, F. H., &Blume, J. L. (1993). Visual search asymmetries in three-dimensional space.Vision Research,33, 2697–2704.
Previc, F. H., &Naegele, P. D. (2001). Target-tilt and vertical-hemifield asymmetries in free-scan search for 3-D targets.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 445–457.
Reicher, G. M., Snyder, C. R., &Richards, J. T. (1976). Familiarity of background characters in visual scanning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,2, 522–530.
Richards, J. T., &Reicher, G. M. (1978). The effect of background familiarity in visual search: An analysis of underlying factors.Perception & Psychophysics,23, 499–505.
Rosenholtz, R. (2001). Search asymmetries? What search asymmetries?Perception & Psychophysics,63, 476–489.
Royden, C. S., Wolfe, J., &Klempen, N. (2001). Visual search asymmetries in motion and optic flow fields.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 436–444.
Schneider, W., &Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention.Psychological Review,84, 1–66.
Shen, J., &Reingold, E. M. (2001). Visual search asymmetry: The influence of stimulus familiarity and low-level features.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 464–475.
Shiffrin, M. R., &Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory.Psychological Review,84, 127–190.
Sun, J., &Perona, P. (1996). Preattentive perception of elementary three dimensional shapes.Vision Research,36, 2515–2529.
Suzuki, S., &Cavanagh, P. (1995). Facial organization blocks access to low-level features: An object inferiority effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,21, 901–913.
Theeuwes, J., &Kooi, J. L. (1994). Parallel search for a conjunction of shape and contrast polarity.Vision Research,34, 3013–3016.
Treisman, A. (1988). Features and objects: The 14th Bartlett Memorial Lecture.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,40A, 201–237.
Treisman, A., &DeSchepper, B. (1996). Object tokens, attention, and visual memory. In T. Inui & J. McClelland (Eds.),Attention and performance XVI: Information integration in perception and communication (pp. 15–46). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Treisman, A., &Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention.Cognitive Psychology,12, 97–136.
Treisman, A., &Gormican, S. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries.Psychological Review,95, 15–48.
Treisman, A., &Souther, J. (1985). Search asymmetry: A diagnostic for preattentive processing of separable features.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,114, 285–310.
von Grünau, M., &Dubé, S. (1994). Visual search asymmetry for viewing direction.Perception & Psychophysics,56, 211–220.
Wang, Q., Cavanagh, P., &Green, M. (1994). Familiarity and pop-out in visual search.Perception & Psychophysics,56, 495–500.
Wolfe, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 202–238.
Wolfe, J. M. (1998a). Visual search. In H. Pashler (Ed.),Attention (pp. 13–74). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
Wolfe, J. M. (1998b). What do 1,000,000 trials tell us about visual search?Psychological Science,9, 33–39.
Wolfe, J. M., &Bennett, S. C. (1997). Preattentive object files: Shapeless bundles of basic features.Vision Research,37, 25–44.
Wolfe, J. M., Cave, K. R., &Franzel, S. L. (1989). Guided search: An alternative to the feature integration model for visual search.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,15, 419–433.
Wolfe, J. M., Friedman-Hill, S. R., Stewart, M. I., &O’Connell, K. M. (1992). The role of categorization in visual search for orientation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 34–49.
Wolfe, J. M., Yee, A., &Friedman-Hill, S. R. (1992). Curvature is a basic feature for visual search.Perception,21, 465–480.
Zelinsky, G. J., &Sheinberg, D. L. (1997). Eye movements during parallel/serial visual search.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,23, 244–262.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wolfe, J.M. Asymmetries in visual search: An introduction. Perception & Psychophysics 63, 381–389 (2001). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194406
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194406