Literature DB >> 17958706

Rare targets are rarely missed in correctable search.

Mathias S Fleck1, Stephen R Mitroff.   

Abstract

Failing to find a tumor in an x-ray scan or a gun in an airport baggage screening can have dire consequences, making it fundamentally important to elucidate the mechanisms that hinder performance in such visual searches. Recent laboratory work has indicated that low target prevalence can lead to disturbingly high miss rates in visual search. Here, however, we demonstrate that misses in low-prevalence searches can be readily abated. When targets are rarely present, observers adapt by responding more quickly, and miss rates are high. Critically, though, these misses are often due to response-execution errors, not perceptual or identification errors: Observers know a target was present, but just respond too quickly. When provided an opportunity to correct their last response, observers can catch their mistakes. Thus, low target prevalence may not be a generalizable cause of high miss rates in visual search.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17958706     DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02006.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Sci        ISSN: 0956-7976


  41 in total

1.  Rare targets are less susceptible to attention capture once detection has begun.

Authors:  Nicholas Hon; Gavin Ng; Gerald Chan
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-04

2.  The effects of local prevalence and explicit expectations on search termination times.

Authors:  Kazuya Ishibashi; Shinichi Kita; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  Spotting rare items makes the brain "blink" harder: Evidence from pupillometry.

Authors:  Megan H Papesh; Juan D Guevara Pinto
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  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

5.  Prevalence effects in newly trained airport checkpoint screeners: trained observers miss rare targets, too.

Authors:  Jeremy M Wolfe; David N Brunelli; Joshua Rubinstein; Todd S Horowitz
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-12-02       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  Faster than the speed of rejection: Object identification processes during visual search for multiple targets.

Authors:  Hayward J Godwin; Stephen C Walenchok; Joseph W Houpt; Michael C Hout; Stephen D Goldinger
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2015-05-04       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  The confirmation and prevalence biases in visual search reflect separate underlying processes.

Authors:  Stephen C Walenchok; Stephen D Goldinger; Michael C Hout
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  When do I quit? The search termination problem in visual search.

Authors:  Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Nebr Symp Motiv       Date:  2012

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

10.  Why do we miss rare targets? Exploring the boundaries of the low prevalence effect.

Authors:  Anina N Rich; Melina A Kunar; Michael J Van Wert; Barbara Hidalgo-Sotelo; Todd S Horowitz; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2008-11-24       Impact factor: 2.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.