October 2020
Volume 20, Issue 11
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   October 2020
Through the eyes of an expert: Evaluating holistic processing in architects using gaze-contingent viewing
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Taren Rohovit
    University of Utah
  • Spencer Ivy
    University of Utah
  • Mark Lavelle
    University of Utah
  • Jeanine Stefanucci
    University of Utah
  • Dustin Stokes
    University of Utah
  • Trafton Drew
    University of Utah
  • Footnotes
    Acknowledgements  Kickstart Grant: University of Utah College of Humanities
Journal of Vision October 2020, Vol.20, 294. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.20.11.294
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Taren Rohovit, Spencer Ivy, Mark Lavelle, Jeanine Stefanucci, Dustin Stokes, Trafton Drew; Through the eyes of an expert: Evaluating holistic processing in architects using gaze-contingent viewing. Journal of Vision 2020;20(11):294. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.20.11.294.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Studies in the psychology of visual expertise have tended to focus on a limited set of expert domains; largely in radiology and athletics. Conclusions drawn from these data indicate that experts use parafoveal vision to process images holistically. In this study, we examined a novel, as-of-yet-unstudied class of visual experts – architects – expecting similar results. However, our study’s data indicate that architects, though visual experts, do not employ the holistic processing strategy analogously to their previously studied counterparts. Participants (n=24) were asked to find targets in x-rays and perspectival images. These images were presented in both gaze contingent and normal conditions. Consistent with the holistic processing model, we expected two results. First, architects would display a greater difference in saccadic amplitude between the gaze contingent and normal conditions. Second, architects would spend less time per search than an undergraduate control group (n=24). However, we found that although the architects were more accurate in the perspectival task, they took more time and displayed a lower difference in saccadic amplitude than the controls. Both undergraduates and architects were equally inaccurate when searching for targets in radiographs, suggesting that visual expertise may not generalize across domains. Our research indicates a disjunctive conclusion. Either architects are simply different kinds of visual experts than those previously studied, or we have generated a task that employs visual expertise without holistic processing. Our data suggest a healthy skepticism for across-the-board inferences collected from a single domain of expertise to the nature of visual expertise generally. Although holism may be a feature of some experts’ ‘perceptual powers,’ we conclude that our data reveal a limit to this law.


This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.