The Use of Iambic Pentameter in the

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Liu, T., Rauschenberger, R., Slotnick, S.D. & Yantis, S. (2003). Neural signatures of amodal completion. Poster session presented at VisionScienceS Society 03, Sarasota, FL and to be published in the Journal of Vision. Marr, D. (1982). Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman. McCafferty, J.D. (1990) Human and Machine Vision, Computing Perceptual Organization, Ellis Horwood. Moore, C. & Brown, L. (2001). Preconstancy information can influence visual search: The case of lightness constancy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 178-194. Moore, C.M. & Egeth, H. (1997). Perception without attention: Evidence of grouping under conditions of inattention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23(2), 339-352. Moore, P. & Fitz, C. (1993). Gestalt theory and instructional design. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 23(2), 137-157. Morrison, D. J. & Schyns, P.G. (2001). Usage of spatial scales for the categorization of faces, objects, and scenes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8(3), 454-469. Nalwa, V. (1993) A guided tour of computer vision. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Nasanen, R. (1999) Spatial frequency bandwidth used in the recognition of facial images. Vision Research, 39(23), 3824-3833. Nass, C. & Gong, L. (1999) Maximized modality or constrained consistency? In Proceedings of the AVSP 99 Conference. 118
Nass, C., Isbister, K., & Lee, E.J. (2000). Truth is beauty: Researching conversational agents. J. Castells (Ed.). Embodied Conversational Agents. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. Nass, C. & Lee, K. M. (2000). Does computer-generated speech manifest personality?An experimental test of similarity-attraction. In Proceedings of the CHI 2000 Conference. Nass, C., Moon, Y., & Green, N. (1997). Are computers gender-neutral? Gender stereotypic responses to computers. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 27, 10, 864–876. Nass, C. & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56 (1), 81-103. Navon, D. (1977). Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception. Cognitive Psychology, 9(3), 353-383. Navon, D. (1981). The forest revisited: More on global precedence. Psychological Research, 43, 1-32. Nielsen, J. (2000). Designing web usability: The practice of simplicity. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders Publishing. Nielsen, J. (2001). Ten Usability Heuristics. Retrieved January 7, 2003 from http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/heuristic_list.html. Niemela, M. & Saarinen, J. (2000). Visual search for grouped versus ungrouped icons in a computer interface. Human Factors 42(4), 630-635. 119
Page 1 and 2:
Time Course of Perceptual Grouping
Page 3 and 4:
Experiment 1 76 Method 76 Results a
Page 5 and 6:
List of Figures Figure 1. Illustrat
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
will look like and how it will comm
Page 13 and 14:
visibility of important interface e
Page 15 and 16:
displays are reported. Global and l
Page 17 and 18:
Electrical activity generated by th
Page 19 and 20:
would not be. It would be easier to
Page 21 and 22:
could be grouped by the principles
Page 23 and 24:
Figure 4. Gestalt principles of gro
Page 25 and 26:
One of the leaders in grouping and
Page 27 and 28:
defined by similar numbers. For exa
Page 29 and 30:
and Saasrinen (2000) observed that
Page 31 and 32:
proximity (Bailey, 1989; Bonney & W
Page 33 and 34:
find the target ‘Picture’ in th
Page 35 and 36:
Humans integrate many types of info
Page 37 and 38:
measures. As a result, the pilot wo
Page 39 and 40:
Figure 10. Pop-up advertisement wit
Page 41 and 42:
soldiers see in these speeded condi
Page 43 and 44:
2001), grouping by proximity and al
Page 45 and 46:
local letters, as illustrated by Fi
Page 47 and 48:
frequency channels at specific rang
Page 49 and 50:
Recent support for the Flexible Usa
Page 51 and 52:
occluded shape as being incomplete
Page 53 and 54:
search for the target in the experi
Page 55 and 56:
Gestalt principle of good continuat
Page 57 and 58:
columns of circles on the opposing
Page 59 and 60:
short stimulus durations can be use
Page 61 and 62:
Figure 15. Results for ambiguous pr
Page 63 and 64:
As shown in Figure 16B, for the lig
Page 65 and 66:
In review these findings, it become
Page 67 and 68:
in user interface display layouts.
Page 69 and 70:
were asked to make decisions about
Page 71 and 72:
columns of pushbuttons on either si
Page 73 and 74:
principles that are depicted more g
Page 75 and 76: no longer perceived. These cases wi
Page 77 and 78: influence what ‘goes together’
Page 79 and 80: participants, randomly with replace
Page 81 and 82: Figure 23. Targets used in reported
Page 83 and 84: participants that were more than th
Page 85 and 86: that was presented in the pilot exp
Page 87 and 88: from three participants because one
Page 89 and 90: see, each of the four distributions
Page 91 and 92: The distribution of data from each
Page 93 and 94: Figure 28. Targets for Experiment 2
Page 95 and 96: Results and discussion Sixteen fema
Page 97 and 98: global grouping was significantly f
Page 99 and 100: Figure 32A depicts a box plot for g
Page 101 and 102: means, the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Te
Page 103 and 104: to group by the alternative scale.
Page 105 and 106: Table 4. Characteristics of RT dist
Page 107 and 108: General Discussion Research that ha
Page 109 and 110: Experiments 2A and 2B were designed
Page 111 and 112: the size scale within an existing i
Page 113 and 114: “Hotmail” has been reported to
Page 115 and 116: They are interesting within the con
Page 117 and 118: forms of similarity could also be t
Page 119 and 120: the context of vision science resea
Page 121 and 122: Bennett, K. B., Nagy, A. L., and Fl
Page 123 and 124: De Valois, R. L. & De Valois, K. K.
Page 125: Johnston, W.A., Schwarting, I.S. &
Page 129 and 130: Palmer, S. E. & Rock, I. (1994). Re
Page 131 and 132: Sanocki, T.(2001). Interaction of s
Page 133 and 134: Tullis, T. S. (1981). An evaluation
Page 135: About the Author Melissa F. Schulz
show all

The Use of Iambic Pentameter in the

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?