ABSTRACT
Evidence of visual persistence has been obtained by the disarmingly direct method of asking subjects to estimate the duration of a visual display. Visual codes of items in the display are formed alongside but independently of a set of name codes, M. Coltheart assumed that visual coding is rapid but the visual store can only hold a few items, while the naming of the items produces the name codes much more slowly. D. H. Holding observed that to a large extent the hypothesis of visual storage and its properties have been accepted 'as a foregone conclusion'. Theories assume that visual stimuli enter the perceptual system via visual information storage (VIS), and Coltheart has emphasized the relation of visual storage to fixation in reading. The disarming possibility presents itself that visual persistence is the result of a 'design defect' in the neural architecture that only shows up under unrepresentative viewing conditions.
