ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2020
Using eye-tracking to parse object recognition: Priming activates primarily a parts-based but also a late-emerging features-based representation.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does exposure within an experiment affect the influence of familiar parts versus wholes on figure assignment?Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- The effect of time on lexical and syntactic processing in aphasia.Journal of neurolinguistics · 2023Article
- It's about time! Time as a parameter for lexical and syntactic processing: an eye-tracking-while-listening investigation.Language, cognition and neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biederman and Cooper (Cognitive Psychology, 23, 393-419, 1991), using parts-deleted and features-deleted stimuli, presented evidence that object priming occurs at the level of the objects' parts, but not features. A control condition confirmed that some priming was accrued by the (non-visual) object concept that the stimulus represented, but all visual-level priming appeared to be at the more global level of the parts of objects, rather than the local level of the individual features (edges, vertices). This outcome has long been viewed as an important piece of supporting evidence for the existence of structural descriptions (e.g., Biederman, Psychological Review, 94, 115, 1987). The original report used a naming response task, and concluded that stimuli presenting half of the parts of an object primed only those parts, whereas half-features-deleted stimuli primed both themselves and the "complementary" half, containing the features deleted from the first image, equally. The current study adapts an eye-tracking approach to enable examination of the time course of priming across an exposure to both the primed image and unprimed competitors. Parts-deleted images primed themselves quickly and exclusively, replicating the finding of Biederman and Cooper (1991). Features-deleted images showed a deviation across time, however; initially a features-deleted prime attracted looking to itself and to its complement equally, but later on, looking to the target deviated upward, demonstrating an ability to distinguish between the two versions. The outcome of the present tests provide support for the primacy of a structural parts description, while also demonstrating the existence of multiple types of representations, both global and local.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32394068What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.