Jim Clark wrote:
> I would side with you up to a point.
(snip)
> The "up to a
> point" concerns whether we can effectively hold _all_ the
> information in the visual display. I think resolution and
> identification falls off dramatically as one moves away from
> fixation, so it would be necessary, I assume, to restrict this
> claim to some effective part of the visual display.
Thanks, Jim, and Shirley, who also sent a source off-list. I certainly
wouldn't expect memory to exceed sensation, so the "up to a point" is only
as far as I was going myself.
Of course, that does raise an interesting question. Does the nonfoveated
information make it into the sensory registers? Does some of it? What
determines exactly what part of the visual field makes it into the
registers?
Paul Smith
Alverno College
