The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Accurate visual memory for previously attended objects in natural scenes.
Abstract
The nature of the information retained from previously fixated (and hence attended) objects in natural scenes was investigated. In a saccade-contingent change paradigm, participants successfully detected type and token changes (Experiment 1) or token and rotation changes (Experiment 2) to a target object when the object had been previously attended but was no longer within the focus of attention when the change occurred. In addition, participants demonstrated accurate type-, token-, and orientationdiscrimination performance on subsequent long-term memory tests (Experiments 1 and 2) and during online perceptual processing of a scene (Experiment 3). These data suggest that relatively detailed visual information is retained in memory from previously attended objects in natural scenes. A model of scene perception and long-term memory is proposed. Because of the size and complexity of the visual environments humans tend to inhabit, and because high-acuity vision is limited to a relatively small area of the visual field, detailed perceptual processing of a natural scene depends on the selection of local scene regions by movements of the eyes (for reviews, see Henderson & Hollingworth, 1998, 1999a). During scene viewing, the eyes are reoriented approximately three times each second by saccadic eye movements to bring the projection of a local scene region (typically a discrete object) onto the area of the retina producing the highest acuity vision (the fovea). The periods between saccades, when the eyes are relatively stationary and detailed visual information is encoded, are termed fixations and last an average of approximately 300 ms during scene viewing. During each brief saccadic eye movement, however, visual encoding is suppressed (Matin, 1974). Thus, the visual system is provided with what amounts to a series of snapshots (corresponding to fixations), which may vary dramatically in their visual content over a complex scene, punctuated by brief periods of blindness (corresponding to saccades).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory
Bourne, L. E. (1977) · Cited by 4,328
The information available in brief visual presentations
Sperling, G. (1960) · Psychological Monographs: General and Applied · doi:10.1037/h0093759 · Cited by 4,042
Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex
Riesenhuber, M., & Poggio, T. (1999) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/14819 · Cited by 3,309
Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading
Barnett, M. A., Singer, H., & Ruddell, R. B. (1987) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.2307/326762 · Cited by 3,086
To See or not to See: The Need for Attention to Perceive Changes in Scenes
Rensink, R. A., O'Regan, J. K., & Clark, J. J. (1997) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00427.x · Cited by 2,338
The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information
Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., & Gibbs, B. J. (1992) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(92)90007-o · Cited by 2,218
Saccade target selection and object recognition: Evidence for a common attentional mechanism
Deubel, H., & Schneider, W. X. (1996) · Vision Research · doi:10.1016/0042-6989(95)00294-4 · Cited by 1,979
Features and Objects: The Fourteenth Bartlett Memorial Lecture
Treisman, A. (1988) · The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A · doi:10.1080/02724988843000104 · Cited by 1,755
Parasuraman, R., & DAVIES, D. R. (1984) · Academic Press eBooks · Cited by 1,566
Recognition memory for words, sentences, and pictures
Shepard, R. N. (1967) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(67)80067-7 · Cited by 1,537
Cited by
Rayner, K. (2009) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470210902816461 · Cited by 2,682
Supersizing the Mind: Embodiment, Action, and Cognitive Extension
Clark, A. (2008) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195333213.001.0001 · Cited by 2,201
Torralba, A., Oliva, A., Castelhano, M. S., & Henderson, J. M. (2006) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.113.4.766 · Cited by 1,639
Self-citationA taxonomy of external and internal attention.
Chun, M. M., Golomb, J. D., & Turk-Browne, N. B. (2011) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100427 · Cited by 1,472
Change blindness: Past, present, and future
Simons, D. J., & Rensink, R. A. (2005) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2004.11.006 · Cited by 1,153
Metadata
- Authors
- Hollingworth, A., & Henderson, J. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
- Published
- 2002-02
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 113-136
- ISSN
- 0096-1523 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1277
- OpenAlex
- W2140448023
- Cited by
- 607
- References
- 80
- FWCI
- 11.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Accurate visual memory for previously attended objects in natural scenes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0096-1523.28.1.113
- The paper
- Hollingworth, A., & Henderson, J. M. (2002). Accurate visual memory for previously attended objects in natural scenes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.28.1.113
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.