Advertisement

Feature Binding in Visual Working Memory

  • Jun Saiki

Abstract

Our visual world contains numerous objects. An important function of the visual system is to recognize an object by comparing perceptual and memory representations. Although we seldom have any problems in recognizing natural objects, which promotes the belief that object recognition is a quite simple process of matching perceptual and memory representations, recognition does in fact involve extremely complicated visual processing. The fact that objects are almost never presented in isolation illustrates the complexity and difficulty of object recognition. The cluttered nature of our visual environment poses an object segmentation problem (including figure/ground segregation problem), which itself is quite difficult. Even if one can successfully segment a set of objects, there is another problem for the visual system to solve: the so-called binding problem. If there are multiple objects, each of which has its own feature values such as shape, color, size, and so on, then how does the visual system properly maintain the correct correspondences of these features? This chapter focuses on this binding problem in both object recognition and visual working memory.

Keywords

Object Recognition Object Type Visual Working Memory Feature Binding Change Detection Task 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alvarez GA, Cavanagh P (2004) The capacity of visual short-term memory is set both by visual information load and by number of objects. Psychol Sci 15:106–111PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashby FG, Prinzmetal W, Ivry R, Maddox WT (1996) A formal theory of feature binding in object perception. Psychol Rev 103:165–192PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biederman I (1987) Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. Psychol Rev 94:115–147PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brainard DH (1997) The psychophysics toolbox. Spat Vis 10:443–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cowan N (2001) The magical number 4 in short-term memory: a reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behav Brain Sci 24:87–185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hayworth KJ, Biederman I (2005) Differential fMRI activity produced by variation in parts and relations during object perception. J Vis 5(8):740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hummel JE, Biederman I (1992) Dynamic binding in a neural network for shape recognition. Psychol Rev 99:480–517PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Imaruoka T, Saiki J, Miyauchi S (2005) Maintaining coherence of dynamic objects requires coordination of neural systems extended from anterior frontal to posterior parietal brain corteces. NeuroImage 26:277–284PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kanwisher NG (1991) Repetition blindness and illusory conjunction: errors in binding visual types with visual tokens. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 17:404–421.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Luck SJ, Vogel EK (1997) The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature 390:279–281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Olson IR, Jiang Y (2002) Is visual short-term memory object based? Rejection of the “strong-object” hypothesis. Percept Psychophys 64:1055–106PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Pelli DG (1997) The video toolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. Spat Vis 10:437–442PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Saiki J (2002) Multiple-object permanence tracking: limitation in maintenance and transformation of perceptual objects. In: Hyona J, Munoz DP, Heide W, Radach R (Eds) The Brain’s eye: neurobiological and clinical aspects of oculomotor research (progress in brain research), Vol. 140. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp 133–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Saiki J (2003a) Feature binding in object-file representations of multiple moving items. J Vis 3:6–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Saiki J (2003b) Spatiotemporal characteristics of dynamic feature binding in visual working memory. Vision Res 43:2107–2123PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Saiki J, Miyatsuji H (2007) Feature binding in visual working memory evaluated by type identification paradigm. Cognition 102:49–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Saiki J, Hummel JE (1998) Connectedness and the part-relation integration in shape perception. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 24:227–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Todd JJ, Marois R (2004) Capacity limit of visual short-term memory in human posterior parietal cortex. Nature 428:751–754PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Vogel EK, Machizawa MG (2004) Neural activity predicts individual differences in visual working memory capacity. Nature 428:748–751PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Vogel EK, Woodman GF, Luck SJ (2001) Storage of features, conjunctions and objects in visual working memory. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 27:92–114PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wheeler ME, Treisman A (2002) Binding in short-term visual memory. J Exp Psychol Gen 131:48–64PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Xu Y (2002) Limitations of object-based feature encoding in visual short-term memory. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 28:458–468PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jun Saiki
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of Human and Environmental StudiesKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations