Literature DB >> 8635311

Just say no: how are visual searches terminated when there is no target present?

M M Chun1, J M Wolfe.   

Abstract

How should a visual search task be terminated when no target is found? Such searches could end after a serial search through all items, but blank trials in many tasks are terminated too quickly for that to be plausible. This paper proposes a solution based on Wolfe's (1994) Guided Search model. The probability that each item is a target is computed in parallel based on items' differences from each other and their similarity to the desired target. This probability is expressed as an activation. Activations are examined in decreasing order until the target is found or until an activation threshold is reached. This threshold is set adaptively by the observer--more conservative following misses, more liberal following successful trials. In addition, observers guess on some trials. The probability of a guess increases as trial duration increases. The model successfully explains blank trial performance. Specific predictions are tested by experiments.

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8635311     DOI: 10.1006/cogp.1996.0002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Psychol        ISSN: 0010-0285            Impact factor:   3.468


  79 in total

1.  Tracking visual search over space and time.

Authors:  E S Olds; W B Cowan; P Jolicoeur
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2000-06

2.  Aging and attentional guidance during visual search: functional neuroanatomy by positron emission tomography.

Authors:  David J Madden; Timothy G Turkington; James M Provenzale; Laura L Denny; Linda K Langley; Thomas C Hawk; R Edward Coleman
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2002-03

3.  Causal interactions in attention networks predict behavioral performance.

Authors:  Xiaotong Wen; Li Yao; Yijun Liu; Mingzhou Ding
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-01-25       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  How the speed of motor-response decisions, but not focal-attentional selection, differs as a function of task set and target prevalence.

Authors:  Thomas Töllner; Dragan Rangelov; Hermann J Müller
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-06-25       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Event-related brain potentials and the efficiency of visual search for vertically and horizontally oriented stimuli.

Authors:  Bruno Kopp; Jasmin Kizilirmak; Carolin Liebscher; Julia Runge; Karl Wessel
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.282

6.  Major issues in the study of visual search: Part 2 of "40 Years of Feature Integration: Special Issue in Memory of Anne Treisman".

Authors:  Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Contrasting effects of repetition across tasks: implications for understanding the nature of refractory behavior and models of semantic memory.

Authors:  Emer M E Forde; Glyn W Humphreys
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 3.282

Review 8.  CNTRICS final task selection: control of attention.

Authors:  Keith H Nuechterlein; Steven J Luck; Cindy Lustig; Martin Sarter
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 9.306

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

Review 10.  Exploration versus exploitation in space, mind, and society.

Authors:  Thomas T Hills; Peter M Todd; David Lazer; A David Redish; Iain D Couzin
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 20.229

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.