Evaluating comparative and equality judgments in contrast perception: attention alters appearance.

Katharina Anton-Erxleben, Jared Abrams, Marisa Carrasco

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Covert attention not only improves performance in many visual tasks but also modulates the appearance of several visual features. Studies on attention and appearance have assessed subjective appearance using a task contingent upon a comparative judgment (e.g., M. Carrasco, S. Ling, & S. Read, 2004). Recently, K. A. Schneider and M. Komlos (2008) questioned the validity of those results because they did not find a significant effect of attention on contrast appearance using an equality task. They claim that such equality judgments are bias-free whereas comparative judgments are bias-prone and propose an alternative interpretation of the previous findings based on a decision bias. However, to date there is no empirical support for the superiority of the equality procedure. Here, we compare biases and sensitivity to shifts in perceived contrast of both paradigms. We measured contrast appearance using both a comparative and an equality judgment. Observers judged the contrasts of two simultaneously presented stimuli, while either the contrast of one stimulus was physically incremented (Experiments 1 and 2) or exogenous attention was drawn to it (Experiments 3 and 4). We demonstrate several methodological limitations of the equality paradigm. Nevertheless, both paradigms capture shifts in PSE due to physical and perceived changes in contrast and show that attention enhances apparent contrast.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)6
Number of pages1
JournalJournal of Vision
Volume10
Issue number11
StatePublished - 2010

Fingerprint

Reproducibility of Results

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology
  • Sensory Systems

Cite this

Evaluating comparative and equality judgments in contrast perception : attention alters appearance. / Anton-Erxleben, Katharina; Abrams, Jared; Carrasco, Marisa.

In: Journal of Vision, Vol. 10, No. 11, 2010, p. 6.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Anton-Erxleben, K, Abrams, J & Carrasco, M 2010, 'Evaluating comparative and equality judgments in contrast perception: attention alters appearance.', Journal of Vision, vol. 10, no. 11, pp. 6.
Anton-Erxleben, Katharina ; Abrams, Jared ; Carrasco, Marisa. / Evaluating comparative and equality judgments in contrast perception : attention alters appearance. In: Journal of Vision. 2010 ; Vol. 10, No. 11. pp. 6.
@article{103715974e0241d29f14a981cacbfeb2,
title = "Evaluating comparative and equality judgments in contrast perception: attention alters appearance.",
abstract = "Covert attention not only improves performance in many visual tasks but also modulates the appearance of several visual features. Studies on attention and appearance have assessed subjective appearance using a task contingent upon a comparative judgment (e.g., M. Carrasco, S. Ling, & S. Read, 2004). Recently, K. A. Schneider and M. Komlos (2008) questioned the validity of those results because they did not find a significant effect of attention on contrast appearance using an equality task. They claim that such equality judgments are bias-free whereas comparative judgments are bias-prone and propose an alternative interpretation of the previous findings based on a decision bias. However, to date there is no empirical support for the superiority of the equality procedure. Here, we compare biases and sensitivity to shifts in perceived contrast of both paradigms. We measured contrast appearance using both a comparative and an equality judgment. Observers judged the contrasts of two simultaneously presented stimuli, while either the contrast of one stimulus was physically incremented (Experiments 1 and 2) or exogenous attention was drawn to it (Experiments 3 and 4). We demonstrate several methodological limitations of the equality paradigm. Nevertheless, both paradigms capture shifts in PSE due to physical and perceived changes in contrast and show that attention enhances apparent contrast.",
author = "Katharina Anton-Erxleben and Jared Abrams and Marisa Carrasco",
year = "2010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "10",
pages = "6",
journal = "Journal of Vision",
issn = "1534-7362",
publisher = "Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology Inc.",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluating comparative and equality judgments in contrast perception

T2 - attention alters appearance.

AU - Anton-Erxleben, Katharina

AU - Abrams, Jared

AU - Carrasco, Marisa

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Covert attention not only improves performance in many visual tasks but also modulates the appearance of several visual features. Studies on attention and appearance have assessed subjective appearance using a task contingent upon a comparative judgment (e.g., M. Carrasco, S. Ling, & S. Read, 2004). Recently, K. A. Schneider and M. Komlos (2008) questioned the validity of those results because they did not find a significant effect of attention on contrast appearance using an equality task. They claim that such equality judgments are bias-free whereas comparative judgments are bias-prone and propose an alternative interpretation of the previous findings based on a decision bias. However, to date there is no empirical support for the superiority of the equality procedure. Here, we compare biases and sensitivity to shifts in perceived contrast of both paradigms. We measured contrast appearance using both a comparative and an equality judgment. Observers judged the contrasts of two simultaneously presented stimuli, while either the contrast of one stimulus was physically incremented (Experiments 1 and 2) or exogenous attention was drawn to it (Experiments 3 and 4). We demonstrate several methodological limitations of the equality paradigm. Nevertheless, both paradigms capture shifts in PSE due to physical and perceived changes in contrast and show that attention enhances apparent contrast.

AB - Covert attention not only improves performance in many visual tasks but also modulates the appearance of several visual features. Studies on attention and appearance have assessed subjective appearance using a task contingent upon a comparative judgment (e.g., M. Carrasco, S. Ling, & S. Read, 2004). Recently, K. A. Schneider and M. Komlos (2008) questioned the validity of those results because they did not find a significant effect of attention on contrast appearance using an equality task. They claim that such equality judgments are bias-free whereas comparative judgments are bias-prone and propose an alternative interpretation of the previous findings based on a decision bias. However, to date there is no empirical support for the superiority of the equality procedure. Here, we compare biases and sensitivity to shifts in perceived contrast of both paradigms. We measured contrast appearance using both a comparative and an equality judgment. Observers judged the contrasts of two simultaneously presented stimuli, while either the contrast of one stimulus was physically incremented (Experiments 1 and 2) or exogenous attention was drawn to it (Experiments 3 and 4). We demonstrate several methodological limitations of the equality paradigm. Nevertheless, both paradigms capture shifts in PSE due to physical and perceived changes in contrast and show that attention enhances apparent contrast.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84891690939&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84891690939&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 20884501

VL - 10

SP - 6

JO - Journal of Vision

JF - Journal of Vision

SN - 1534-7362

IS - 11

ER -