| Creator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Language |
|
| Publisher |
|
| Date |
|
| Source Title |
|
| Vol |
|
| Issue |
|
| First Page |
|
| Last Page |
|
| Publication Type |
|
| Access Rights |
|
| Rights |
|
| Related DOI |
|
|
|
| Abstract |
This study examined whether a briefly presented target was mislocalized toward a subjective contour. Observers manually reproduced the position of a briefly presented peripheral target circle above a ...central fixation cross. A luminance contour, a subjective contour, or a no-contour stimulus was presented in either the left or right visual field, and a no-contour control was presented in the opposite visual field. After these stimuli vanished, a target circle was then presented. Consequently, the degree of mislocalization toward the subjective and luminance contours was the same; this indicated that image integration at a coarse spatial scale cannot explain mislocalization. Experiment 2 revealed that the mislocalization in Experiment 1 was not a result of eye movements. Experiment 3 found that the spatial attention allocated at the location of the luminance and subjective contours was more than that allocated at the no-contour stimulus. An attentional shift toward the task-irrelevant stimulus resulted in a mislocalization of the target.show more
|
Export Mendeley
yypr08