Visual search and foraging compared in a large-scale search task.

It has been argued that visual search is a valid model for human foraging. However, the two tasks differ greatly in terms of the coding of space and the effort required to search. Here we describe a direct comparison between visually guided searches (as studied in visual search tasks) and foraging that is not based upon a visually distinct target, within the same context. The experiment was conducted in a novel apparatus, where search locations were indicated by an array of lights embedded in the floor. In visually guided conditions participants searched for a target defined by the presence of a feature (red target amongst green distractors) or the absence of a feature (green target amongst red and green distractors). Despite the expanded search scale and the different response requirements, these conditions followed the pattern found in conventional visual search paradigms: feature-present search latencies were not linearly related to display size, whereas feature-absent searches were longer as the number of distractors increased. In a non-visually guided foraging condition, participants searched for a target that was only visible once the switch was activated. This resulted in far longer latencies that rose markedly with display size. Compared to eye-movements in previous visual search studies, there were few revisit errors to previously inspected locations in this condition. This demonstrates the important distinction between visually guided and non-visually guided foraging processes, and shows that the visual search paradigm is an equivocal model for general search in any context. We suggest a comprehensive model of human spatial search behaviour needs to include search at a small and large scale as well as visually guided and non-visually guided search.