Literature DB >> 28056636

The price of information: Increased inspection costs reduce the confirmation bias in visual search.

Jason Rajsic1, Daryl E Wilson2, Jay Pratt1.   

Abstract

In visual search, there is a confirmation bias such that attention is biased towards stimuli that match a target template, which has been attributed to covert costs of updating the templates that guide search [Rajsic, Wilson, & Pratt, 2015. Confirmation bias in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/xhp0000090]. In order to provide direct evidence for this speculation, the present study increased the cost of inspections in search by using gaze- and mouse-contingent searches, which restrict the manner in which information in search displays can be accrued, and incur additional motor costs (in the case of mouse-contingent searches). In a fourth experiment, we rhythmically mask elements in the search display to induce temporal inspection costs. Our results indicated that confirmation bias is indeed attenuated when inspection costs are increased. We conclude that confirmation bias results from the low-cost strategy of matching information to a single, concrete visual template, and that more sophisticated guidance strategies will be used when sufficiently beneficial. This demonstrates that search guidance itself comes at a cost, and that the form of guidance adopted in a given search depends on a comparison between guidance costs and the expected benefits of their implementation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Confirmation bias; Decision making; Visual attention; Visual search

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 28056636     DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2016.1278249

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)        ISSN: 1747-0218            Impact factor:   2.143


  2 in total

1.  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

2.  Comparing virtual reality, desktop-based 3D, and 2D versions of a category learning experiment.

Authors:  Robin Colin Alexander Barrett; Rollin Poe; Justin William O'Camb; Cal Woodruff; Scott Marcus Harrison; Katerina Dolguikh; Christine Chuong; Amanda Dawn Klassen; Ruilin Zhang; Rohan Ben Joseph; Mark Randall Blair
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-10-06       Impact factor: 3.752

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.