Abstract
Evidence for adaptive event integration has previously been provided using the Rapid Serial Visual Presentation (RSVP) task. However, it is not straightforward to generalize this finding to other types of tasks that measure temporal integration, because integration in such tasks is known to vary, depending on the method that is used. This variability has been seen as an indication that integration may result from more than a single type of perceptual persistence, and that different integration tasks may not tap into same type of persistence. Therefore, we investigated whether adaptive control of integration in the RSVP task can be replicated using another technique for measuring temporal integration, which may rely more on low-level mechanisms, namely the dot-array integration or Missing Element Task (MET). As in the RSVP studies, stimulus speed expectancy was presently manipulated. The results indicated that integration performance in the MET was not subject to adaptive control. We argue that this discrepancy with previous RSVP studies can most likely be attributed to a specific difference in the type of persistence underlying task performance. Temporal integration in the MET might rely mostly on visible persistence, while for the RSVP task integration relies more on informational persistence. The present findings suggest that, contrary to informational persistence, visible persistence may not be susceptible to adaptive control.
Highlights
The perceptual system is continuously exposed to changing information from the environment
We investigated whether adaptive control of integration in the Rapid Serial Visual Presentation (RSVP) task can be replicated using another technique for measuring temporal integration, which may rely more on low-level mechanisms, namely the dot-array integration or Missing Element Task (MET)
The present study was designed to determine whether the adaptive control of temporal integration that was previously observed in the RSVP task can be generalized to integration in the MET
Summary
The perceptual system is continuously exposed to changing information from the environment. To process such dynamic input reliably and to maintain perceptual continuity, it is necessary to integrate incoming information over time. Experimental results have confirmed that our perceptual system does so: When two pieces of information occur in a short period, they are likely to be perceived as part of the same event or as a single object (Di Lollo, 1980; Eriksen & Collins, 1967; Hogben & Di Lollo, 1974). A kind of persistence is considered to underlie temporal integration (Coltheart, 1980), which can be explained as follows: Because of delays in the on- and offset of the neural activity in response to a stimulus, it continues to be ‘visible’ for a short period after termination of its physical presence. If a second stimulus appears in this period, its image can overlap and interact with the first one (Efron, 1970a; Eriksen & Collins, 1967; Sperling, 1967)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
