Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31414857›Full record

ArticlePsychology and aging2019

Hybrid foraging search in younger and older age.

Iris Wiegand, Caroline Seidel, Jeremy Wolfe

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychology and aging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Research on re-searching: interrupted foraging is not disrupted foraging.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. The Predation Game: Does dividing attention affect patterns of human foraging?Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2021
    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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Iris WiegandVisual Attention Lab, Brigham and Women's Hospital.ORCID 0000-0003-2160-7939
Caroline SeidelDepartment of Psychology, Goethe University Frankfurt.
Jeremy WolfeVisual Attention Lab, Brigham and Women's Hospital.
Brigham and Women's Hospital · USGoethe University Frankfurt · DE

Funding

Prevalence effects in visual search: Theoretical and practical implicationsR01EY017001 · NEI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI Jeremy M Wolfe · 2007 to 2026
$8.2M
Army Research OfficeEuropean UnionNEI NIH HHS R01 EY017001NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In hybrid foraging tasks, observers search visual displays, so called patches, for multiple instances of any of several types of targets with the goal of collecting targets as quickly as possible. Here, targets were photorealistic objects. Younger and older adults collected targets by mouse clicks. They could move to the next patch whenever they decided to do so. The number of targets held in memory varied between 8 and 64 objects, and the number of items (targets and distractors) in the patches varied between 60 and 105 objects. Older adults foraged somewhat less efficiently than younger adults due to a more exploitative search strategy. When target items became depleted in a patch and search slowed down, younger adults acted according to the optimal foraging theory and moved on to the next patch when the instantaneous rate of collection was close to their average rate of collection. Older adults, by contrast, were more likely to stay longer and spend time searching for the last few targets. Within a patch, both younger and older adults tended to collect the same type of target in "runs." This behavior is more efficient than continual switching between target types. Furthermore, after correction for general age-related slowing, RT × set size functions revealed largely preserved attention and memory functions in older age. Hybrid foraging tasks share features with important real-world search tasks. Differences between younger and older observers on this task may therefore help to explain age differences in many complex search tasks of daily life. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

AgingCognitive AgingMemoryAgedAged, 80 and overAttentionFemaleForm PerceptionHumansLifeMaleMemory, Short-TermMiddle AgedMotivationPattern Recognition, VisualPhotic Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID31414857
PMCPMC6710116
OpenAlexW2968743771

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.