Abstract
Milberg and McGlinchey (2010) claim that the conclusions we reach in “Perceptual Grouping Operates Independently of Attentional Selection: Evidence From Hemispatial Neglect” are unwarranted. Specifically, it is asserted that insufficient methodological control was exerted over the attentional status of the patients and that partial attention to the contralesional field could have resulted in the congruency effects we observe. Although we agree with their methodological cautions in general, we argue that our investigation is, in fact, methodologically sound. In particular, we reiterate and highlight that our investigation is unprecedented in the characterization of a patient sample with multiple clinical, psychophysical, and experimental measures; in our use of a stringent, rigidly controlled paradigm specifically designed for investigating perceptual grouping without awareness; in our modification of the experimental procedure to make it even more stringent; and in our specific methodological choices for comparison/control conditions within this experimental paradigm. We also demonstrate that partial attention to the contralesional left cannot support the robust congruency effects we observe. In light of this, we remain confident of our interpretation of our findings and suggest that perceptual grouping can indeed operate in the absence of attention.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Behrmann, M., Barton, J. J. S., Watt, S., & Black, S. E. (1997). Impaired visual search in patients with unilateral neglect: An oculographic analysis. Neuropsychologia, 35, 1445–1458.
Behrmann, M., Moscovitch, M., Black, S. E., & Mozer, M. (1990). Perceptual and conceptual factors in neglect dyslexia: Two contrasting case studies. Brain, 113, 1163–1183.
Berger, M. F., Pross, R. D., Ilg, U. J., & Karnath, H. O. (2006). Deviation of eyes and head in acute cerebral stroke. BMC Neurology, 6, 23.
Driver, J., Davis, G., Russell, C., Turatto, M., & Freeman, E. (2001). Segmentation, attention and phenomenal visual objects. Cognition, 80, 61–95.
Farah, M. J. (1994). Visual perception and visual awareness after brain damage: A tutorial review. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 37–76). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
Friedrich, F. J., Egly, R., Rafal, R. D., & Beck, D. (1998). Spatial attention deficits in humans: A comparison of superior parietal and temporal-parietal junction lesions. Neuropsychology, 12, 193–207.
Hartman-Maeir, A., & Katz, N. (1995). Validity of the Behavioral Inattention Test (BIT): Relationships with functional tasks. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 49, 507–516.
Karnath, H. O., & Fetter, M. (1995). Ocular space exploration in the dark and its relation to subjective and objective body orientation in neglect patients with parietal lesions. Neuropsychologia, 33, 371–377.
Kimchi, R., & Peterson, M. A. (2008). Figure-ground segmentation can occur without attention. Psychological Science, 19, 660–668.
Kimchi, R., & Razpurker-Apfeld, I. (2004). Perceptual grouping and attention: Not all groupings are equal. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 687–696.
Köhler, S., & Moscovitch, M. (1997). Unconscious visual processing in neuropsychological syndromes: A survey of the literature and evaluation of models of consciousness. In M. Rugg (Ed.), Cognitive neuroscience (pp. 305–373). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lavie, N. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 21, 451–468.
Mack, A., & Rock, I. (1998). Inattentional blindness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Marshall, J. C., & Halligan, P. W. (1988). Blindsight and insight in visuo-spatial neglect. Nature, 336, 766–767.
McGlinchey-Berroth, R. (1997). Visual information processing in hemispatial neglect. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1, 91–97.
McGlinchey-Berroth, R., Milberg, W. P., Verfaellie, M., Alexander, M., & Kilduff, P. T. (1993). Semantic processing in the neglected field: Evidence from a lexical decision task. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 10, 79–108.
McGlinchey-Berroth, R., Milberg, W. P., Verfaellie, M., Grande, L., D’Esposito, M., & Alexander, M. (1996). Semantic processing and orthographic specificity in hemispatial neglect. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 291–304.
Merikle, P. M., Smilek, D., & Eastwood, J. D. (2001). Perception without awareness: Perspectives from cognitive psychology. Cognition, 79, 115–134.
Milberg, W. P., & McGlinchey, R. E. (2010). Comment on Shomstein, Kimchi, Hammer, and Behrmann (2010): A case study in methodological anosagnosia? Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 619–621.
Mitroff, S. R., Simons, D. J., & Franconeri, S. L. (2002). The siren song of implicit change detection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 28, 798–815.
Moore, C., & Egeth, H. (1997). Perception without attention: Evidence of grouping under conditions of inattention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 23, 339–352.
Mozer, M. C., & Behrmann, M. (1990). On the interaction of selective attention and lexical knowledge: A connectionist account of neglect dyslexia. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2, 96–123.
Posner, M. I., Snyder, C. R., & Davidson, B. J. (1980). Attention and the detection of signals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 160–174.
Russell, C., & Driver, J. (2005). New indirect measures of “inattentive” visual grouping in a change-detection task. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 606–623.
Shomstein, S., Kimchi, R., Hammer, M., & Behrmann, M. (2010). Perceptual grouping operates independently of attentional selection: Evidence from hemispatial neglect. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 607–618.
Volpe, B. T., Ledoux, J. E., & Gazzaniga, M. S. (1979). Information processing of visual stimuli in an “extinguished” field. Nature, 282, 722–724.
Wilson, B., Cockburn, J., & Halligan, P. W. (1987). Behavioural Inattention Test. Bury St. Edmunds: Thames Valley Test Co.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This work was supported by National Institute of Mental Health Grant MH54246 to M.B. and National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Grant NS07391-09 to S.S.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Behrmann, M., Shomstein, S. & Kimchi, R. Conscious awareness of methodological choices: A reply to Milberg and McGlinchey (2010). Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 72, 622–627 (2010). https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.3.622
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.3.622