The effects of aging on figure/ground perception: Reduced competition resolution in older observers.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The bias for young observers to perceive convex regions as figure increases as the number of alternating black and white (BW) convex and concave regions increases from 2 to 8 (Peterson & Salvagio, 2008). Lass et al. (VSS 2012) replicated this convexity context effect (CCE) in younger observers for BW stimuli, but found significantly reduced CCEs in older observers. Based on previous research (Salvagio & Peterson, VSS 2011, 2012), we hypothesized that older observers might have difficulty resolving the competition between figure and ground interpretations for homogeneously coloured convex regions in 8-region BW displays. Salvagio and Peterson reduced competition for convex regions by alternating heterogeneously coloured convex regions with homogenously coloured concave regions. For their younger observers, CCEs emerged earlier in time. We examined whether the convexity bias in older observers is influenced by the colour heterogeneity of convex and concave regions. Older (n = 15) and younger (n = 16) observers viewed four types of 8-region displays blocked by region-type: (1) both-homogeneous (BW), (2) homogeneous-concave/heterogeneous-convex, (3) heterogeneous-concave/homogenous-convex, and (4) both-heterogeneous. On each trial, observers fixated a central border and reported whether a red probe presented to the left or right of center was on or off the region perceived as figure. Probe location was balanced, and the dependent variable was the proportion of trials the convex region was perceived as figure. Convexity biases were larger for displays with homogeneous- versus heterogeneous-concave regions, p <.001; this difference did not differ between age groups. However, the difference between convexity bias measured in the homogeneous-concave and homogeneous-both (BW) conditions was greater in older observers, p <.05. This increase in convexity bias observed in older observers, specifically in displays with reduced competition, indicates that there are age differences in competition resolution ability that affect CCEs, and thus figure assignment more generally. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2013
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".