Perceptual errors support the notion of masking by object substitution

Tools

Pilling, M., Guest, D. ORCID: 0000-0003-4514-9186 and Andrews, M. ORCID: 0000-0001-7499-9521, 2019. Perceptual errors support the notion of masking by object substitution. Perception, 48 (2), pp. 138-161. ISSN 0301-0066

Preview

Text
13082_Guest.pdf - Post-print
Download (525kB) | Preview

Official URL: http://doi.org/10.1177/0301006619825782

Abstract

Two experiments examined the effect of Object Substitution Masking (OSM) on the perceptual errors in reporting the orientation of a target. In Experiment 1 a four-dot trailing mask was compared with a simultaneous-noise mask. In Experiment 2, the four-dot and noise masks were factorially-varied. Responses were modelled using a mixture regression-model and Bayesian-inference to deduce whether the relative impacts of OSM on guessing and precision were the same as those of a noise mask, and thus whether the mechanism underpinning OSM is based on increasing noise rather than a substitution process. Across both experiments, OSM was associated with an increased guessing-rate when the mask trailed target offset, and a reduction in the precision of the target representation (although the latter was less reliable across the two experiments). Importantly, the noise mask also influenced both guessing and precision, but in a different manner, suggesting that OSM is not simply caused by increasing noise. In Experiment 2 the effects of OSM and simultaneous-noise interacted, suggesting the two manipulations involve common mechanisms. Overall results suggest that OSM is often a consequence of a substitution process, but there is evidence that the mask increases noise levels on trials where substitution doesn’t occur.

Item Type:

Journal article

Publication Title:

Perception

Creators:

Pilling, M., Guest, D. and Andrews, M.

Publisher:

Sage

Date:

February 2019

Volume:

Number: