Does the standard search task predict performance in related tasks for Kanizsa-style illusory contours?

It is often assumed that results from standard visual search tasks will be replicated in related tasks but his idea is rarely tested. In a conceptual replication of Li, Cave, and Wolfe (2008), we investigated the attentional demands of Kanizsa-style illusory contours using orientation-based search, comparing performance for items defined by real- as compared to illusory contours. After confirming the initial findings in standard search, we tested the same manipulation in multiple-target search, Thornton and Gilden's (2007) hybrid standard/multiple-target search, and simple- and selective enumeration. The RT slope differences between real- and illusory contours did not replicate in Thornton and Gilden's task, though they did in multiple-target search and selective enumeration. In fact, absolute differences between real- and illusory contours in RT costs per distractor were 2 - 6 times larger than in standard search. To determine whether performance differences between real and illusory contours originated from shape-definition (necessary for distinguishing target shapes from distractors) or unit formation (grouping disconnected parts to define an item/unit), simple and selective enumeration were compared. The differences between real- and illusory-contours only emerged in selective enumeration (enumerating targets among distractors), which suggests the discrepancies between conditions originate from shape definition rather than unit formation processes. There was no evidence of subitizing in selective enumeration for illusory contour figures, but contrary to attention-based theories of enumeration, there was no subitizing for the real-contour controls either. This study contributes to research on illusory contours but it is especially important to the study of search and enumeration.