| Title |
Incremental grouping of image elements in vision
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.3758/s13414-011-0200-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pieter R. Roelfsema, Roos Houtkamp |
| Abstract |
One important task for the visual system is to group image elements that belong to an object and to segregate them from other objects and the background. We here present an incremental grouping theory (IGT) that addresses the role of object-based attention in perceptual grouping at a psychological level and, at the same time, outlines the mechanisms for grouping at the neurophysiological level. The IGT proposes that there are two processes for perceptual grouping. The first process is base grouping and relies on neurons that are tuned to feature conjunctions. Base grouping is fast and occurs in parallel across the visual scene, but not all possible feature conjunctions can be coded as base groupings. If there are no neurons tuned to the relevant feature conjunctions, a second process called incremental grouping comes into play. Incremental grouping is a time-consuming and capacity-limited process that requires the gradual spread of enhanced neuronal activity across the representation of an object in the visual cortex. The spread of enhanced neuronal activity corresponds to the labeling of image elements with object-based attention. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 4% |
| Germany | 4 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 4 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 161 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 40 | 22% |
| Researcher | 30 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 25 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 30 | 16% |
| Unknown | 29 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 58 | 32% |
| Neuroscience | 35 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 12% |
| Computer Science | 15 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 19 | 10% |
| Unknown | 29 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 August 2022.
All research outputs
#7,438,907
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#377
of 1,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,365
of 128,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#1
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 128,338 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.