Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31267479›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2020

Medium versus difficult visual search: How a quantitative change in the functional visual field leads to a qualitative difference in performance.

Johan Hulleman, Kristofer Lund, Paul A Skarratt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Guided Search 6.0: An updated model of visual search.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2021
    Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Johan HullemanSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. johan.hulleman@manchester.ac.uk.
Kristofer LundSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Paul A SkarrattDepartment of Psychology, University of Hull, Hull, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The dominant theories of visual search assume that search is a process involving comparisons of individual items against a target description that is based on the properties of the target in isolation. Here, we present four experiments that demonstrate that this holds true only in difficult search. In medium search it seems that the relation between the target and neighbouring items is also part of the target description. We used two sets of oriented lines to construct the search items. The cardinal set contained horizontal and vertical lines, the diagonal set contained left diagonal and right diagonal lines. In all experiments, participants knew the identity of the target and the line set used to construct it. In difficult search this knowledge allowed performance to improve in displays where only half of the search items came from the same line set as the target (50% eligibility), relative to displays where all items did (100% eligibility). However, in medium search, performance was actually poorer for 50% eligibility, especially on target-absent trials. This opposite effect of ineligible items in medium search and difficult search is hard to reconcile with theories based on individual items. It is more in line with theories that conceive search as a sequence of fixations where the number of items processed during a fixation depends on the difficulty of the search task: When search is medium, multiple items are processed per fixation. But when search is difficult, only a single item is processed.

Indexed as

Orientation, SpatialPsychological TheoryVisual FieldsVisual PerceptionAdultAttentionFemaleHumansMaleReaction TimeAttentional Engagement Theory (AET)Eye movementsFeature Integration Theory (FIT)Functional Visual Field (FVF)Guided SearchTask difficultyVisual search

Identifiers

PMID31267479
PMCPMC6994550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.