Target redundancy in visual search: Do repetitions of the target within thedisplay impair processing?
DOI: 10.3758/bf03199869
archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified
Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)
Summary
This 1979 study by Charles W. Eriksen and Barbara A. Eriksen investigates whether repeating a target stimulus within a visual display impairs or facilitates processing speed, addressing a theoretical conflict between two models of visual search. The interactive channels model (Estes; Bjork & Murray) predicts that identical noise elements compete for input channels with the target, causing inhibition and slowing recognition. Conversely, the continuous flow model (Eriksen & Schultz) posits that parallel processing allows redundant targets to prime responses without interference, potentially facilitating performance. The authors aim to determine which model better explains the effects of target redundancy on reaction time (RT). Experiment 1 employed a response competition paradigm where subjects identified a target letter (H, S, K, or C) presented above a fixation point, flanked by six noise letters. The study manipulated noise type (compatible, incompatible, neutral, or none), feature similarity (identical to target vs. other member of response set), and target-noise spacing (.06° to 1.0°). Results showed that RT was longest for incompatible noise and shortest for compatible noise. Crucially, under compatible conditions, targets flanked by identical noise were processed faster than those flanked by dissimilar but response-compatible noise, and RTs for identical noise did not differ significantly from the no-noise control. These findings supported the continuous flow model’s prediction of response competition rather than the interactive channels model’s prediction of input channel inhibition. However, no facilitation relative to the no-noise control was observed, likely due to the cognitive load of spatially discriminating the target among identical noise. Experiment 2 was designed to isolate potential facilitation effects by eliminating the need for spatial discrimination. Trials were blocked by noise type or spacing, allowing subjects to know the display structure in advance. Despite this control, target redundancy still did not impair performance relative to single-target controls, nor did it produce significant facilitation. The authors concluded that while target repetitions do not impair processing as predicted by the interactive channels model, they also do not accelerate it in this paradigm. The study demonstrates that response competition at the level of internal recognition responses is a dominant factor in visual search, overshadowing any potential benefits of perceptual redundancy.
Provenance
The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.
| Stage | Outcome | Tool | Model | Prompt | Attempts | Completed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| discover | success | Crossref | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-17 |
| archive | success | canonical_url | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-25 |
| extract | success | pdftotext | — | — | 2 | 2026-06-26 |
| clean | success | clean | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-26 |
| chunk | success | chunk | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-26 |
| embed | success | embed | Qwen/Qwen3-Embedding-8B | — | 1 | 2026-06-26 |
| enrich | failed | — | — | — | 5 | 2026-07-05 |
| promote | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-17 |
| summarize | success | llm | qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant | summ-v5 | 1 | 2026-06-25 |
| tag | success | vector_similarity | — | — | 6 | 2026-06-26 |
| verify | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-26 |
Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-25; verification: verified.
Topics
Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.