ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2024
What is the basis of ensemble subset selection?
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2024. 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.
- Similarity in feature space dictates the efficiency of attentional selection during ensemble processing.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- Categorical frequency judgments as effective ensemble judgments for object features.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Ensemble percepts of colored targets among distractors are influenced by hue similarity, not categorical identity.Journal of vision · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The visual system can rapidly calculate the ensemble statistics of a set of objects; for example, people can easily estimate an average size of apples on a tree. To accomplish this, it is not always useful to summarize all the visual information. If there are various types of objects, the visual system should select a relevant subset: only apples, not leaves and branches. Here, we ask what kind of visual information makes a "good" ensemble that can be selectively attended to provide an accurate summary estimate. We tested three candidate representations: basic features, preattentive object files, and full-fledged bound objects. In four experiments, we presented a target and several distractors' sets of differently colored objects. We found that conditions where a target ensemble had at least one unique color (basic feature) provided ensemble averaging performance comparable to the baseline displays without distractors. When the target subset was defined as a conjunction of two colors or color-shape partly shared with distractors (so that they could be differentiated only as preattentive object files), subset averaging was also possible but less accurate than in the baseline and feature conditions. Finally, performance was very poor when the target subset was defined by an exact feature relationship, such as in the spatial conjunction of two colors (spatially bound object). Overall, these results suggest that distinguishable features and, to a lesser degree, preattentive object files can serve as the representational basis of ensemble selection, while bound objects cannot.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38351233What 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.