Literature DB >> 15066400

How fast can you change your mind? The speed of top-down guidance in visual search.

Jeremy M Wolfe1, Todd S Horowitz, Naomi Kenner, Megan Hyle, Nina Vasan.   

Abstract

Most laboratory visual search tasks involve many searches for the same target, while in the real world we typically change our target with each search (e.g. find the coffee cup, then the sugar). How quickly can the visual system be reconfigured to search for a new target? Here observers searched for targets specified by cues presented at different SOAs relative to the search stimulus. Search for different targets on each trial was compared to search for the same target over a block of trials. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that an exact picture cue acts within 200 ms to make varied target conjunction search as fast and efficient as blocked conjunction search. Word cues were slower and never as effective. Experiment 3 replicated this result with a task that required top-down information about target identity. Experiment 4 showed that the effects of an exact picture cue were not mandatory. Experiments 5 and 6 used pictures of real objects to cue targets by category level.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15066400     DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2003.11.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  79 in total

1.  Working memory and target-related distractor effects on visual search.

Authors:  Alex Bahrami Balani; David Soto; Glyn W Humphreys
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2010-12

2.  Enhancing visual working memory encoding: The role of target novelty.

Authors:  Jutta S Mayer; Jejoong Kim; Sohee Park
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2011

3.  Understanding the function of visual short-term memory: transsaccadic memory, object correspondence, and gaze correction.

Authors:  Andrew Hollingworth; Ashleigh M Richard; Steven J Luck
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2008-02

4.  The role of working memory representations in the control of attention.

Authors:  Geoffrey F Woodman; Steven J Luck; Jeffrey D Schall
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 5.357

5.  Matching of visual input to only one item at any one time.

Authors:  Roos Houtkamp; Pieter R Roelfsema
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2008-07-30

Review 6.  A theory of eye movements during target acquisition.

Authors:  Gregory J Zelinsky
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Guidance and selection history in hybrid foraging visual search.

Authors:  Jeremy M Wolfe; Matthew S Cain; Avigael M Aizenman
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 8.  CNTRICS final task selection: control of attention.

Authors:  Keith H Nuechterlein; Steven J Luck; Cindy Lustig; Martin Sarter
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 9.306

9.  Failures of perception in the low-prevalence effect: Evidence from active and passive visual search.

Authors:  Michael C Hout; Stephen C Walenchok; Stephen D Goldinger; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2015-04-27       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 10.  Using multidimensional scaling to quantify similarity in visual search and beyond.

Authors:  Michael C Hout; Hayward J Godwin; Gemma Fitzsimmons; Arryn Robbins; Tamaryn Menneer; Stephen D Goldinger
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 2.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.