↓ Skip to main content

The temporal window of individuation limits visual capacity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
132 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The temporal window of individuation limits visual capacity
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00952
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andreas Wutz, David Melcher

Abstract

One of the main tasks of vision is to individuate and recognize specific objects. Unlike the detection of basic features, object individuation is strictly limited in capacity. Previous studies of capacity, in terms of subitizing ranges or visual working memory, have emphasized spatial limits in the number of objects that can be apprehended simultaneously. Here, we present psychophysical and electrophysiological evidence that capacity limits depend instead on time. Contrary to what is commonly assumed, subitizing, the reading-out a small set of individual objects, is not an instantaneous process. Instead, individuation capacity increases in steps within the lifetime of visual persistence of the stimulus, suggesting that visual capacity limitations arise as a result of the narrow window of feedforward processing. We characterize this temporal window as coordinating individuation and integration of sensory information over a brief interval of around 100 ms. Neural signatures of integration windows are revealed in reset alpha oscillations shortly after stimulus onset within generators in parietal areas. Our findings suggest that short-lived alpha phase synchronization (≈1 cycle) is key for individuation and integration of visual transients on rapid time scales (<100 ms). Within this time frame intermediate-level vision provides an equilibrium between the competing needs to individuate invariant objects, integrate information about those objects over time, and remain sensitive to dynamic changes in sensory input. We discuss theoretical and practical implications of temporal windows in visual processing, how they create a fundamental capacity limit, and their role in constraining the real-time dynamics of visual processing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
France 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 123 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 19%
Researcher 25 19%
Student > Master 24 18%
Student > Postgraduate 9 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 5%
Other 26 20%
Unknown 16 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 59 45%
Neuroscience 23 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 4%
Computer Science 5 4%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 22 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 August 2014.
All research outputs
#14,784,335
of 22,761,738 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,054
of 29,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,571
of 236,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#275
of 375 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,761,738 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,672 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 236,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 375 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.