Literature DB >> 25872176

Using the past to anticipate the future in human foraging behavior.

Jinxia Zhang1, Xue Gong2, Daryl Fougnie3, Jeremy M Wolfe4.   

Abstract

Humans engage in many tasks that involve gathering multiple targets from their environment (e.g., picking berries from a patch). Such foraging tasks raise questions about how observers maximize target collection - e.g., how long should one spend at one berry patch before moving to the next patch. Classic optimal foraging theories propose a simple decision rule: People move on when current intake drops below the average rate. Previous studies of foraging often assume this average is fixed and predict no strong relationship between the contents of the immediately preceding patch or patches and the current patch. In contrast to this prediction, we found evidence of temporal effects in a laboratory analog of a berry-picking task. Observers stayed longer when previous patches were better. This result is the opposite of what would be predicted by a model in which the assessment of the average rate is biased in favor of recent patches. This result was found when patch quality varied systematically over the course of the experiment (Experiment 1). Smaller effects were seen when patch quality was randomized (Experiment 2). Together, these results suggest that optimal foraging theories must account for the recent history to explain current behavior.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Context effect; History effect; Human foraging; Optimal foraging; Temporal structure; Visual search

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25872176      PMCID: PMC4442738          DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2015.04.003

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


  9 in total

1.  Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem.

Authors:  E L Charnov
Journal:  Theor Popul Biol       Date:  1976-04       Impact factor: 1.570

2.  Optimal foraging in patches: a case for stochasticity.

Authors:  A Oaten
Journal:  Theor Popul Biol       Date:  1977-12       Impact factor: 1.570

3.  Fishing for the right words: decision rules for human foraging behavior in internal search tasks.

Authors:  Andreas Wilke; John M C Hutchinson; Peter M Todd; Uwe Czienskowski
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2009-05

4.  Winter is coming: How humans forage in a temporally structured environment.

Authors:  Daryl Fougnie; Sarah M Cormiea; Jinxia Zhang; George A Alvarez; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015-08-01       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  A bayesian optimal foraging model of human visual search.

Authors:  Matthew S Cain; Edward Vul; Kait Clark; Stephen R Mitroff
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2012-08-06

6.  When is it time to move to the next raspberry bush? Foraging rules in human visual search.

Authors:  Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-01-01       Impact factor: 2.240

7.  Overt visual attention as a causal factor of perceptual awareness.

Authors:  Tim C Kietzmann; Stephan Geuter; Peter König
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-07-25       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Serial dependence in visual perception.

Authors:  Jason Fischer; David Whitney
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2014-03-30       Impact factor: 24.884

9.  Multi-timescale perceptual history resolves visual ambiguity.

Authors:  Jan W Brascamp; Tomas H J Knapen; Ryota Kanai; André J Noest; Raymond van Ee; Albert V van den Berg
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2008-01-30       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total
  4 in total

1.  Winter is coming: How humans forage in a temporally structured environment.

Authors:  Daryl Fougnie; Sarah M Cormiea; Jinxia Zhang; George A Alvarez; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015-08-01       Impact factor: 2.240

Review 2.  Foraging behavior in visual search: A review of theoretical and mathematical models in humans and animals.

Authors:  Marcos Bella-Fernández; Manuel Suero Suñé; Beatriz Gil-Gómez de Liaño
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2021-03-21

3.  Biased belief updating and suboptimal choice in foraging decisions.

Authors:  Neil Garrett; Nathaniel D Daw
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-07-09       Impact factor: 14.919

4.  Looking ahead: When do you find the next item in foraging visual search?

Authors:  Anna Kosovicheva; Abla Alaoui-Soce; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2020-02-10       Impact factor: 2.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.