ArticleJournal of vision2024
A signal-detection account of item-based and ensemble-based visual change detection: A reply to Harrison, McMaster, and Bays.
Article in Journal of vision, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Similarity-driven compression during encoding supports biased but more precise working memory.Journal of vision · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Growing empirical evidence shows that ensemble information (e.g., the average feature or feature variance of a set of objects) affects visual working memory for individual items. Recently, Harrison, McMaster, and Bays (2021) used a change detection task to test whether observers explicitly rely on ensemble representations to improve their memory for individual objects. They found that sensitivity to simultaneous changes in all memorized items (which also globally changed set summary statistics) rarely exceeded a level predicted by the so-called optimal summation model within the signal-detection framework. This model implies simple integration of evidence for change from all individual items and no additional evidence coming from ensemble. Here, we argue that performance at the level of optimal summation does not rule out the use of ensemble information. First, in two experiments, we show that, even if evidence from only one item is available at test, the statistics of the whole memory set affect performance. Second, we argue that optimal summation itself can be conceptually interpreted as one of the strategies of holistic, ensemble-based decision. We also redefine the reference level for the item-based strategy as the so-called "minimum rule," which predicts performance far below the optimum. We found that that both our and Harrison et al. (2021)'s observers consistently outperformed this level. We conclude that observers can rely on ensemble information when performing visual change detection. Overall, our work clarifies and refines the use of signal-detection analysis in measuring and modeling working memory.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.