Literature DB >> 16078032

Saccadic search performance: the effect of element spacing.

Björn N S Vlaskamp1, Eelco A B Over, Ignace Th C Hooge.   

Abstract

In a saccadic search task, we investigated whether spacing between elements affects search performance. Since it has been suggested in the literature that element spacing can affect the eye movement strategy in several ways, its effects on search time per element are hard to predict. In the first experiment, we varied the element spacing (3.4 degrees -7.1 degrees distance between elements) and target-distracter similarity. As expected, search time per element increased with target-distracter similarity. Decreasing element spacing decreased the search time per element. However, this effect was surprisingly small in comparison to the effect of varying target-distracter similarity. In a second experiment, we elaborated on this finding and decreased element spacing even further (between 0.8 degrees and 3.2 degrees). Here, we did not find an effect on search time per element for element spacings from 3.2 degrees to spacings as small as 1.5 degrees . It was only at distances smaller than 1.5 degrees that search time per element increased with decreasing element spacing. In order to explain the remarkable finding that search time per element was not affected for such a wide range of element spacings, we propose that irrespective of the spacing crowding kept the number of elements processed per fixation more or less constant.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16078032     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-005-0032-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  31 in total

1.  Effect of stimulus contrast on performance and eye movements in visual search.

Authors:  R Näsänen; H Ojanpää; I Kojo
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  Peripheral vision and oculomotor control during visual search.

Authors:  I T Hooge; C J Erkelens
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Effects of lateral masking and spatial precueing on gap-resolution in central and peripheral vision.

Authors:  T A Nazir
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  The guidance of eye movements during active visual search.

Authors:  B C Motter; E J Belky
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

Review 6.  Eye movements and reading.

Authors:  J K O'Regan
Journal:  Rev Oculomot Res       Date:  1990

7.  Visual conspicuity, visual search and fixation tendencies of the eye.

Authors:  F L Engel
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1977       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Lateral masking as a function of spacing.

Authors:  G Wolford; L Chambers
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1983-02

9.  Determinants of eye-fixation duration.

Authors:  T A Salthouse; C L Ellis
Journal:  Am J Psychol       Date:  1980-06

10.  The effect of similarity and duration on spatial interaction in peripheral vision.

Authors:  F L Kooi; A Toet; S P Tripathy; D M Levi
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1994
View more
  13 in total

1.  Cube search, revisited.

Authors:  Xuetao Zhang; Jie Huang; Serap Yigit-Elliott; Ruth Rosenholtz
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015-03-16       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  A summary statistic representation in peripheral vision explains visual search.

Authors:  Ruth Rosenholtz; Jie Huang; Alvin Raj; Benjamin J Balas; Livia Ilie
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2012-04-20       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Eye tracking: empirical foundations for a minimal reporting guideline.

Authors:  Kenneth Holmqvist; Saga Lee Örbom; Ignace T C Hooge; Diederick C Niehorster; Robert G Alexander; Richard Andersson; Jeroen S Benjamins; Pieter Blignaut; Anne-Marie Brouwer; Lewis L Chuang; Kirsten A Dalrymple; Denis Drieghe; Matt J Dunn; Ulrich Ettinger; Susann Fiedler; Tom Foulsham; Jos N van der Geest; Dan Witzner Hansen; Samuel B Hutton; Enkelejda Kasneci; Alan Kingstone; Paul C Knox; Ellen M Kok; Helena Lee; Joy Yeonjoo Lee; Jukka M Leppänen; Stephen Macknik; Päivi Majaranta; Susana Martinez-Conde; Antje Nuthmann; Marcus Nyström; Jacob L Orquin; Jorge Otero-Millan; Soon Young Park; Stanislav Popelka; Frank Proudlock; Frank Renkewitz; Austin Roorda; Michael Schulte-Mecklenbeck; Bonita Sharif; Frederick Shic; Mark Shovman; Mervyn G Thomas; Ward Venrooij; Raimondas Zemblys; Roy S Hessels
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2022-04-06

Review 4.  The uncrowded window of object recognition.

Authors:  Denis G Pelli; Katharine A Tillman
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 24.884

Review 5.  ICAT: a computational model for the adaptive control of fixation durations.

Authors:  Hans A Trukenbrod; Ralf Engbert
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2014-08

6.  Visuomotor crowding: the resolution of grasping in cluttered scenes.

Authors:  Paul F Bulakowski; Robert B Post; David Whitney
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2009-11-16       Impact factor: 3.558

7.  A neurophysiologically plausible population code model for feature integration explains visual crowding.

Authors:  Ronald van den Berg; Jos B T M Roerdink; Frans W Cornelissen
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2010-01-22       Impact factor: 4.475

8.  Training shortens search times in children with visual impairment accompanied by nystagmus.

Authors:  Bianca Huurneman; F Nienke Boonstra
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-09-12

9.  Search performance is better predicted by tileability than presence of a unique basic feature.

Authors:  Honghua Chang; Ruth Rosenholtz
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 2.240

10.  Competing Distractors Facilitate Visual Search in Heterogeneous Displays.

Authors:  Garry Kong; David Alais; Erik Van der Burg
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-08-10       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.