Transsaccadic representation of layout: What is the time course of boundary extension?

Abstract

How rapidly does boundary extension occur? Across experiments, trials included a 3-scene sequence (325 ms/picture), masked interval, and repetition of 1 scene. The repetition was the same view or differed (more close-up or wide angle). Observers rated the repetition as same as, closer than, or more wide angle than the original view on a 5-point scale. Masked intervals were 100, 250, 625, or 1,000 ms in Experiment 1 and 42, 100, or 250 ms in Experiments 2 and 3. Boundary extension occurred in all cases: Identical views were rated as too "close-up," and distractor views elicited the rating asymmetry typical of boundary extension (wider angle distractors were rated as being more similar to the original than were closer up distractors). Most important, boundary extension was evident when only a 42-ms mask separated the original and test views. Experiments 1 and 3 included conditions eliciting a gaze shift prior to the rating test; this did not eliminate boundary extension. Results show that boundary extension is available soon enough and is robust enough to play an on-line role in view integration, perhaps supporting incorporation of views within a larger spatial framework.