MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970779417 · doi:10.1167/3.9.762

Forest, Trees and Leaves: Interference Effects in 3-Level Navon Figures

2010· article· en· W1970779417 on OpenAlexaff
Charles A. Collin, Mary‐Ellen Large, Patricia A. McMullen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEquatingStimulus (psychology)PerceptionPsychologyCognitive psychologyDominance (genetics)Social psychologyBiologyDevelopmental psychologyNeuroscienceGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Navon's seminal findings on global-local attention suggested that global forms dominate perception. One reason why this might be the case is that, in Navon's figures the local elements are surrounded by other similar elements while the global level is alone in space. To test this possibility, we examined interference effects in 3-level hierarchical figures, which consisted of a large configuration made up of medium configurations, which were in turn made up of small figures. In this stimulus, the small elements are local to the medium elements, which are in turn local to the large. Subjects were asked to identify digit or arrow targets at all three hierarchical levels under conditions where the two response-irrelevant levels could be compatible, incompatible or neutral with regards to the correct response. Based on previous research, one would expect the medium elements to dominate the small, due to the greater globality of the former. Contrary to this, we found mutual and equal interference between these two levels under these circumstances. We suggest that this is due to the presence of the large level, which serves to equalize the degree of flanking at the global (medium) and local (small) levels of our stimuli. Previous work has found that flanking elements can have positive or negative effects on response latency. By equating the amount of flanking at the two levels in our 3-level stimuli, we have eliminated global dominance.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207