Cortex
Volume 46, Issue 5 , Pages 621-636, May 2010

New insights into feature and conjunction search: I. Evidence from pupil size, eye movements and ageing

  • Gillian Porter

      Affiliations

    • Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, UK
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, 12a Priory Road, Bristol BS8 1TU, UK.
  • ,
  • Andrea Tales

      Affiliations

    • Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, UK
    • Department of Care of the Elderly, University of Bristol, The BRACE Centre, Blackberry Hill Hospital, Fishponds, UK
  • ,
  • Tom Troscianko

      Affiliations

    • Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, UK
  • ,
  • Gordon Wilcock

      Affiliations

    • Department of Care of the Elderly, University of Bristol, The BRACE Centre, Blackberry Hill Hospital, Fishponds, UK
    • Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Headington, UK
  • ,
  • Judy Haworth

      Affiliations

    • Department of Care of the Elderly, University of Bristol, The BRACE Centre, Blackberry Hill Hospital, Fishponds, UK
  • ,
  • Ute Leonards

      Affiliations

    • Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, UK

Received 7 February 2008; received in revised form 27 May 2008 and 30 September 2008; accepted 23 April 2009. published online 10 July 2009.

Action editor Robin Morris

Abstract 

Differences in the processing mechanisms underlying visual feature and conjunction search are still under debate, one problem being a common emphasis on performance measures (speed and accuracy) which do not necessarily provide insights to the underlying processing principles. Here, eye movements and pupil dilation were used to investigate sampling strategy and processing load during performance of a conjunction and two feature-search tasks, with younger (18–27 years) and healthy older (61–83 years) age groups compared for evidence of differential age-related changes. The tasks involved equivalent processing time per item, were controlled in terms of target–distractor similarity, and did not allow perceptual grouping. Close matching of the key tasks was confirmed by patterns of fixation duration and an equal number of saccades required to find a target. Moreover, moment-to-moment pupillary dilation was indistinguishable across the tasks for both age groups, suggesting that all required the same total amount of effort or resources.

Despite matching, subtle differences in eye movement patterns occurred between tasks: the conjunction task required more saccades to reach a target-absent decision and involved shorter saccade amplitudes than the feature tasks. General age-related changes were manifested in an increased number of saccades and longer fixation durations in older than younger participants. In addition, older people showed disproportionately longer and more variable fixation durations for the conjunction task specifically. These results suggest a fundamental difference between conjunction and feature search: accurate target identification in the conjunction context requires more conservative eye movement patterns, with these further adjusted in healthy ageing. The data also highlight the independence of eye movement and pupillometry measures and stress the importance of saccades and strategy for understanding the processing mechanisms driving different types of visual search.

Keywords: Visual search, Saccades, Pupil dilation, Ageing, Conjunction

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0010-9452(09)00163-4

doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2009.04.013

Refers to erratum:

Cortex
Volume 46, Issue 5 , Pages 621-636, May 2010