IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pbio00/0040056.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Visual Clutter Causes High-Magnitude Errors

Author

Listed:
  • Stefano Baldassi
  • Nicola Megna
  • David C Burr

Abstract

Perceptual decisions are often made in cluttered environments, where a target may be confounded with competing “distractor” stimuli. Although many studies and theoretical treatments have highlighted the effect of distractors on performance, it remains unclear how they affect thequality of perceptual decisions. Here we show that perceptual clutter leads not only to an increase in judgment errors, but also to an increase in perceived signal strength and decision confidence on erroneous trials. Observers reported simultaneously the direction and magnitude of the tilt of a target grating presented either alone, or together with vertical distractor stimuli. When presented in isolation, observers perceived isolated targets as only slightly tilted on error trials, and had little confidence in their decision. When the target was embedded in distractors, however, they perceived it to be strongly tilted on error trials, and had high confidence of their (erroneous) decisions. The results are well explained by assuming that the observers' internal representation of stimulus orientation arises from a nonlinear combination of the outputs of independent noise-perturbed front-end detectors. The implication that erroneous perceptual decisions in cluttered environments are made with high confidence has many potential practical consequences, and may be extendable to decision-making in general. Visual targets imbedded in distractors lead not only to judgment errors, but also to higher confidence about erroneous decisions. The signed max model provides a plausible framework for explaining the disparity between perception and reality.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefano Baldassi & Nicola Megna & David C Burr, 2006. "Visual Clutter Causes High-Magnitude Errors," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(3), pages 1-1, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pbio00:0040056
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040056
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.0040056
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.0040056&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040056?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Leopold Zizlsperger & Thomas Sauvigny & Thomas Haarmeier, 2012. "Selective Attention Increases Choice Certainty in Human Decision Making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(7), pages 1-9, July.
    2. Manisha Bhardwaj & Ronald van den Berg & Wei Ji Ma & Krešimir Josić, 2016. "Do People Take Stimulus Correlations into Account in Visual Search?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.
    3. Martin Graziano & Mariano Sigman, 2009. "The Spatial and Temporal Construction of Confidence in the Visual Scene," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(3), pages 1-10, March.
    4. Jordan Harold & Irene Lorenzoni & Thomas F. Shipley & Kenny R. Coventry, 2020. "Communication of IPCC visuals: IPCC authors’ views and assessments of visual complexity," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 255-270, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pbio00:0040056. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosbiology (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.