Investigating the stability of and relationships among global/local processing measures

Global/local stimuli have been used to estimate global processing biases in individuals and groups, as well as in response to various manipulations. Throughout the literature, multiple different versions of global/local stimuli have been used, such as traditional hierarchical letters and numbers (i.e., Navon letters), abstract hierarchical shapes, and high- and low-spatial-frequency gratings and faces. However, currently it is unclear how reliable or stable performance is on these measures within individuals over time, and whether these seemingly different measures are tapping into the same underlying process. As such, the purpose of the present study was to examine the stability of individual performance on three distinct global/local measures over time and to examine the relationships among the measures. In two studies, we examined the reliability of the biases within, and the relationships among, standard Navon letters in a traditional interference task, hierarchical shapes in a forced choice task, and superimposed high- and low-pass spatial frequency faces in a forced choice task. In both studies, participants completed all three of the tasks, and then returned 7–10 days later to again complete the same tasks. The degree of global/local bias within an individual was found to be highly reliable in the hierarchical shape task and the spatial frequency face task, but less reliable in the traditional Navon letter task. Interestingly, in both studies we found that none of the three measures of global bias were related to each other. Therefore, while these measures do appear to be reliable over time, they may be tapping into distinct aspects of global/local processing.