On the relation between identifying and locating masked targets in visual search.

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution , reselling , loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Three experiments were designed to determine whether naming is contingent on locating in a visual search task. Subjects were required to identify a masked target whose location was known (IIL) or unknown (I) and to locate a masked target whose identity was known (LII) or unknown (L). The location-contingent hypothesis predicts a relationship among the tasks such that P(L) P(I1L) =P(I), since P(1) and P(L) P(1IL) both estimate the joint probability of identifying and locating the target (i.e. P(1nL)). This relationship held in Experiment I where targets were presented alone, and in Experiment I1 where targets were presented with dots as noise elements, but not in Experiment I11 where Xs were noise elements. The results are discussed in terms of the generality of the location-contingent hypothesis.