Literature DB >> 15559108

Termination of a visual search with large display size effects.

Denis Cousineau1, Richard M Shiffrin.   

Abstract

The ability to locate an object in the visual field is a collaboration of at least three intermingled processes: scanning multiple locations, recognizing the object sought (the target), and ending the search in cases when the target is not found. In this paper, we focus on the termination rule. Using distribution analyses, it is possible to assess the probability of termination conditional on the number of locations examined. The results show that on some trials without target, the participants carried out more comparisons than there are objects in the display; in other conditions, they carried out fewer comparisons than objects. Because there were very few errors, the premature stops were not pure guesses. We present models to account for these findings. The distributions of terminations help determine the slopes of the functions relating response time to set size.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15559108     DOI: 10.1163/1568568041920104

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spat Vis        ISSN: 0169-1015


  13 in total

Review 1.  Serial vs. parallel models of attention in visual search: accounting for benchmark RT-distributions.

Authors:  Rani Moran; Michael Zehetleitner; Heinrich René Liesefeld; Hermann J Müller; Marius Usher
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-10

2.  Low target prevalence is a stubborn source of errors in visual search tasks.

Authors:  Jeremy M Wolfe; Todd S Horowitz; Michael J Van Wert; Naomi M Kenner; Skyler S Place; Nour Kibbi
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2007-11

3.  Studying visual search using systems factorial methodology with target-distractor similarity as the factor.

Authors:  Mario Fifić; James T Townsend; Ami Eidels
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2008-05

4.  Logical-rule models of classification response times: a synthesis of mental-architecture, random-walk, and decision-bound approaches.

Authors:  Mario Fific; Daniel R Little; Robert M Nosofsky
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 8.934

5.  Response-time tests of logical-rule models of categorization.

Authors:  Daniel R Little; Robert M Nosofsky; Stephen E Denton
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 6.  Exploration versus exploitation in space, mind, and society.

Authors:  Thomas T Hills; Peter M Todd; David Lazer; A David Redish; Iain D Couzin
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 20.229

7.  When is it time to move to the next map? Optimal foraging in guided visual search.

Authors:  Krista A Ehinger; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Reaction time distributions constrain models of visual search.

Authors:  Jeremy M Wolfe; Evan M Palmer; Todd S Horowitz
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2009-11-04       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Even in correctable search, some types of rare targets are frequently missed.

Authors:  Michael J Van Wert; Todd S Horowitz; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 2.199

10.  Interhemispheric integration in visual search.

Authors:  Stewart Shipp
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2011-05-27       Impact factor: 3.139

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.