Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Competition-induced visual field differences in search.

J H Fecteau1, J T Enns, A Kingstone

  • 1Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4.

Psychological Science
|March 7, 2001
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Processing of visual social-communication cues during a social-perception of action task in autistic and non-autistic observers.

Neuropsychologia·2024
Same author

Coming to grips with reality: Real grasps, but not pantomimed grasps, resist a simultaneous tilt illusion.

Neuropsychologia·2023
Same author

A Fusion Algorithm for Saccade Eye Movement Enhancement With EOG and Lumped-Element Models.

IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering·2021
Same author

Visual search in ADHD, ASD and ASD + ADHD: overlapping or dissociating disorders?

European child & adolescent psychiatry·2020
Same author

Monsters are people too.

Biology letters·2012
Same author

Evidence against a speed limit in multiple-object tracking.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2008
Same journal

A Field Experiment Testing Whether Accountability Reduces Racial Gaps in Performance Evaluations.

Psychological science·2026
Same journal

Does Testosterone Affect Cognitive Reflection? Evidence From a Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Study of 1,000 Participants.

Psychological science·2026
Same journal

Does Overconfidence Really Confer Adaptive Benefits to Children's Learning?

Psychological science·2026
Same journal

How Does the Mind Grow? Cross-Cultural Intuitive Theories of Mental Development.

Psychological science·2026
Same journal

Not All Practice Is Created Equal: Longitudinal Evidence From Over 40,000 Chess Players.

Psychological science·2026
Same journal

Eye Glint as a Novel Perceptual Cue in Human Vision.

Psychological science·2026
See all related articles

Visual field effects in search tasks suggest differences in how visual information is processed, not just where it

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Visual Perception
  • Neuroscience

Background:

  • Visual field effects in search tasks are well-documented.
  • Existing theories debate whether these effects stem from cortical representation differences or differential usage by other brain regions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate whether visual field effects in visual search arise from differences in cortical representation or how these representations are utilized.
  • To provide evidence favoring the 'differences in use' hypothesis.

Main Methods:

  • Examined three attributes of visual search: competition, task specialization, and anatomical alignment.
  • Competition: Assessed search efficiency differences between whole- and half-field displays.
  • Task specialization: Analyzed hemispheric biases in search tasks using identical stimuli.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Anatomical alignment: Investigated how display quadrant alignment with cortical quadrants affects competition effects.

    • Main Results:

    • Competition effects were more pronounced in whole-field compared to half-field displays.
    • Certain tasks showed hemispheric specialization, favoring one hemisphere over the other.
    • Competition effects were modulated by the alignment of visual display quadrants with observer's cortical quadrants.

    Conclusions:

    • Visual field specialization in search is likely due to competition for limited access to cortical visual representations.
    • These findings support the hypothesis that visual field differences are primarily driven by how neural networks, particularly attention networks, utilize visual information.