Five experiments explored short-term memory and incidental learning for random visual spatio-temporal sequences. In each experiment, human observers saw samples of 8Hz temporally-modulated 1D or 2D contrast noise sequences whose members were either uncorrelated across an entire 1-s long stimulus sequence, or comprised two frozen noise sequences that repeated identically between a stimulus' first and second 500ms halves ("Repeated" noise). Presented with randomly intermixed stimuli of both types, observers judged whether each sequence repeated or not. Additionally, a particular exemplar of Repeated noise (a frozen or "Fixed Repeated" noise) was interspersed multiple times within a block of trials. As previously shown with auditory frozen noise stimuli (Agus, Thorpe, & Pressnitzer, 2010) recognition performance (d') increased with successive presentations of a Fixed Repeated stimulus, and exceeded performance with regular Repeated noise. However, unlike the case with auditory stimuli, learning of random visual stimuli was slow and gradual, rather than fast and abrupt. Reverse correlation revealed that contrasts occupying particular temporal positions within a sequence had disproportionately heavy weight in observers' judgments. A subsequent experiment suggested that this result arose from observers' uncertainty about the temporal mid-point of the noise sequences. Additionally, discrimination performance fell dramatically when a sequence of contrast values was repeated, but in reverse ("mirror image") order. This poor performance with temporal mirror images is strikingly different from vision's exquisite sensitivity to spatial mirror images.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 October 2013.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Vision Research
#2,209
of 2,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,499
of 215,514 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vision Research
#7
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,497 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 215,514 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
