File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Conference Paper: How do people quit visual search? Justifications for a deadline model

TitleHow do people quit visual search? Justifications for a deadline model
Authors
Issue Date2011
PublisherAssociation for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology. The Journal's web site is located at http://wwwjournalofvisionorg/
Citation
The 11th Annual Meeting of the Vision Sciences Society, Naples, FL., 6-11 May 2011. In Journal of Vision, 2011, v. 11 n. 11, article no. 1305 How to Cite?
AbstractHow do people decide when to stop a search when there is no target? Most discussions on this question revolve around two models. In their simplest form, the drift diffusion model suggests that a decision is reached when sufficient evidence of target presence or absence is accumulated, and the deadline model suggests that people estimate a deadline for each search and stop when it is due. We conducted an experiment that tests against a deadline model, which assumes that search deadlines are calibrated for the observer?s search experience in target-present trials. We 'produced' some experimental blocks that were generally faster (or slower) by choosing more (or fewer) easy trials in these blocks, while the target-absent trials in these blocks were not censored. We expected a sooner search deadline for a 'fast' block, rendering faster absent RTs. Results confirmed this expectation for large set sizes, but not for a small set size, justifying a deadline model. Analysis of data suggests that the faster absent RTs were not due to rhythmic responses. It is documented elsewhere that median absent RT generally overestimates miss rate with regard to the corresponding present RT distribution, violating the deadline model (Wolfe, Palmer, & Horowitz, 2010). However, we replicated this violation only for a small set size, but estimations based on median absent RT were very accurate for large set sizes. This mirrored the above results. In light of the present results, we suggest that observers generally adopt a deadline approach, unless a search is expedited by some evidence of an absence of target. In our case, evidence of absence may come about when a single glimpse is sufficient to confirm all items as distractors. In other cases, uniformity of stimulus or learned statistical signals of the scene may contribute.
DescriptionOpen Access Journal
This journal issue is the 2011 meeting abstracts
Poster Presentation - Visual search: Elements, cues and configurations: 53.434
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/137995
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.341
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.042

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChan, Len_US
dc.contributor.authorHayward, Wen_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-08-26T14:37:57Z-
dc.date.available2011-08-26T14:37:57Z-
dc.date.issued2011en_US
dc.identifier.citationThe 11th Annual Meeting of the Vision Sciences Society, Naples, FL., 6-11 May 2011. In Journal of Vision, 2011, v. 11 n. 11, article no. 1305en_US
dc.identifier.issn1534-7362-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/137995-
dc.descriptionOpen Access Journal-
dc.descriptionThis journal issue is the 2011 meeting abstracts-
dc.descriptionPoster Presentation - Visual search: Elements, cues and configurations: 53.434-
dc.description.abstractHow do people decide when to stop a search when there is no target? Most discussions on this question revolve around two models. In their simplest form, the drift diffusion model suggests that a decision is reached when sufficient evidence of target presence or absence is accumulated, and the deadline model suggests that people estimate a deadline for each search and stop when it is due. We conducted an experiment that tests against a deadline model, which assumes that search deadlines are calibrated for the observer?s search experience in target-present trials. We 'produced' some experimental blocks that were generally faster (or slower) by choosing more (or fewer) easy trials in these blocks, while the target-absent trials in these blocks were not censored. We expected a sooner search deadline for a 'fast' block, rendering faster absent RTs. Results confirmed this expectation for large set sizes, but not for a small set size, justifying a deadline model. Analysis of data suggests that the faster absent RTs were not due to rhythmic responses. It is documented elsewhere that median absent RT generally overestimates miss rate with regard to the corresponding present RT distribution, violating the deadline model (Wolfe, Palmer, & Horowitz, 2010). However, we replicated this violation only for a small set size, but estimations based on median absent RT were very accurate for large set sizes. This mirrored the above results. In light of the present results, we suggest that observers generally adopt a deadline approach, unless a search is expedited by some evidence of an absence of target. In our case, evidence of absence may come about when a single glimpse is sufficient to confirm all items as distractors. In other cases, uniformity of stimulus or learned statistical signals of the scene may contribute.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherAssociation for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology. The Journal's web site is located at http://wwwjournalofvisionorg/-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Visionen_US
dc.titleHow do people quit visual search? Justifications for a deadline modelen_US
dc.typeConference_Paperen_US
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=1534-7362&volume=11&issue=11&spage=article no. 1305&epage=&date=2011&atitle=How+do+people+quit+visual+search?+Justifications+for+a+deadline+model-
dc.identifier.emailChan, L: clouis@graduate.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.emailHayward, W: whayward@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityChan, L=rp00851en_US
dc.identifier.authorityHayward, W=rp00630en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1167/11.11.1305-
dc.identifier.hkuros191738en_US
dc.identifier.volume11-
dc.identifier.issue11-
dc.description.otherThe 11th Annual Meeting of the Vision Sciences Society, Naples, FL., 6-11 May 2011. In Journal of Vision, 2011, v. 11 n. 11, article no. 1305-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats