FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2572350817> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2572350817 abstract "Visual Search as a Combination of Automatic and Attentive Processes Chris Donkin (cdonkin@indiana.edu) Rich Shiffrin (shiffrin@indiana.edu) Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, 1101 E. 10 th St. Bloomington, IN 47408 USA Abstract We present a model in which visual search behavior is assumed to result from a combination of controlled, serial search and automatic attraction of attention to target stimuli. The model provides a quantitative framework for how these different processes are combined, and despite a large number of constraints, it is highly successful in accounting for human search behavior at the level of full response time distributions and choice probabilities. Keywords: visual search; computational modeling; automatic and attention processes; response times. Visual search tasks usually require an observer to determine whether or not a pre-defined target object is present within a display of objects (the display size, D, is the number of objects in the display, and displays either contain all foils, or instead one target with the rest foils). Performance in such tasks is usually measured by response time, because accuracy tends to be quite high. The results have been used to understand the processes of visual search, the factors that determine attention allocation, and the use of automatic and parallel vs. controlled and serial processes of comparison. The last of these is the focus of this research. Various factors contribute to whether search is automatic or controlled. Low-level perceptual differences between targets and foils, for instance a green target amidst red foils, facilitate automatic search behavior, produce response times that do not vary (much) with display size, and are often termed to ‘popout’ in line with subjective impressions (Triesman & Gelade, 1980). Even when targets do not ‘popout’ perceptually, consistent training (in which targets remain targets, and foils remain foils) in most cases gradually causes the targets to attract attention automatically, measured by the fact that the dependence on display size drops (Shiffrin & Schneider, 1977). However, the amount of such learning is dependent on the relation of the target shapes to foil shapes: For example, when a conjunction of features is needed to define targets, search generally appears more controlled (slower search rates) and automatic attraction of attention to targets is slower to develop. When the plot of mean response time, RT, to D has a slope near zero, search is considered parallel and automatic; when it has a large slope (usually roughly linear) search is often assumed to be serial (one item in the display at a time), or controlled. If the slope of target absent responses is about twice that for target present responses search is usually assumed to terminate once a target is found in the serial set of comparisons. Townsend and colleagues have argued convincingly, however, that analyses based on mean response times in standard visual search are relatively uninformative regarding the processes underlying search (e.g. Townsend & Nozawa, 1995). For example the function relating mean RT to D is insufficient for distinguishing serial from parallel search without strong additional assumptions. As we shall see, much more can be learned about visual search through analysis of full response time distributions. Complementing research identifying conditions in which search might be either automatic or serial (Thornton & Gilden, 2007), is research developing a unified model which can account for all search behavior (e.g., Wolfe’s guided search model, 2007). Our aim, in what follows, is to build upon these efforts and develop and implement a framework for how automatic and controlled search processes combine to produce the various types of observed visual search behavior. The model is fit to results partially reported in Cousineau and Shiffrin (2004), in which three participants received up to 80 sessions of training. It is similar to Wolfe’s Guided Search theory in a number of respects, including a serial search process that is guided to target items by an automatic parallel process. Model When a display appears a set of consecutive serial comparisons without replacement is initiated. The order of comparisons is chosen by the observer, and is random with respect to the actual target position. The order of comparisons can be interrupted, however, when search is guided by a separate parallel process that forces the next comparison to a target position. Search terminates when a comparison to a target occurs with a positive (i.e. target present) response, or with a negative response (i.e. target absent) when all display positions are compared unsuccessfully. As we will discuss later, however, a separate decision is sometimes made to terminate before all comparisons are finished (i.e. early termination of search). The Serial Comparison Process Each comparison involves a decision as to whether an item in the display is either a target or a foil. We model this decision using a relatively simple evidence accumulation model, based on the Linear Ballistic Accumulator (LBA) model (Brown & Heathcote, 2008). Figure 1 contains a graphical depiction of the comparison process. We assume" @default.
• W2572350817 created "2017-01-26" @default.
• W2572350817 creator A5014175026 @default.
• W2572350817 creator A5053621830 @default.
• W2572350817 date "2011-01-01" @default.
• W2572350817 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2572350817 title "Visual Search as a Combination of Automatic and Attentive Processes." @default.
• W2572350817 cites W1965729921 @default.
• W2572350817 cites W1989191993 @default.
• W2572350817 cites W2033116767 @default.
• W2572350817 cites W2081484203 @default.
• W2572350817 cites W2098205603 @default.
• W2572350817 cites W2140158033 @default.
• W2572350817 cites W2149095485 @default.
• W2572350817 cites W2156046656 @default.
• W2572350817 cites W2162781179 @default.
• W2572350817 cites W2916251204 @default.
• W2572350817 cites W2185354292 @default.
• W2572350817 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
• W2572350817 type Work @default.
• W2572350817 sameAs 2572350817 @default.
• W2572350817 citedByCount "4" @default.
• W2572350817 countsByYear W25723508172013 @default.
• W2572350817 countsByYear W25723508172014 @default.
• W2572350817 countsByYear W25723508172015 @default.
• W2572350817 countsByYear W25723508172017 @default.
• W2572350817 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2572350817 hasAuthorship W2572350817A5014175026 @default.
• W2572350817 hasAuthorship W2572350817A5053621830 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C101068787 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C120665830 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C121684516 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C153050134 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C158495155 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C169900460 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C178253425 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C180747234 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C19012869 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C192209626 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C26760741 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C2781238097 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C101068787 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C120665830 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C121332964 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C121684516 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C153050134 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C154945302 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C15744967 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C158495155 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C169760540 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C169900460 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C178253425 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C180747234 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C19012869 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C192209626 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C26760741 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C2781238097 @default.
• W2572350817 hasConceptScore W2572350817C41008148 @default.
• W2572350817 hasIssue "33" @default.
• W2572350817 hasLocation W25723508171 @default.
• W2572350817 hasOpenAccess W2572350817 @default.
• W2572350817 hasPrimaryLocation W25723508171 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W114503769 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W1424343586 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W1981368373 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2017192832 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2017350677 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2034053812 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2037243844 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2038738600 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2042839275 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2057781674 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2061840904 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2068108712 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2080659776 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2082764138 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2117218311 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2129435010 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2140158033 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2167371665 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W2970608243 @default.
• W2572350817 hasRelatedWork W3089437460 @default.
• W2572350817 hasVolume "33" @default.
• W2572350817 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2572350817 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2572350817 magId "2572350817" @default.
• W2572350817 workType "article" @default.