Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33825054›Full record

ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2021

Expert camouflage-breakers can accurately localize search targets.

Fallon Branch, Allison JoAnna Lewis, Isabella Noel Santana, Jay Hegdé

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Fallon BranchDepartment of Neuroscience and Regenerative Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, CA-2003, 1469 Laney Walker Blvd, Augusta, GA, 30912-2697, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9169-0796
Allison JoAnna LewisDepartment of Neuroscience and Regenerative Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, CA-2003, 1469 Laney Walker Blvd, Augusta, GA, 30912-2697, USA.
Isabella Noel SantanaDepartment of Neuroscience and Regenerative Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, CA-2003, 1469 Laney Walker Blvd, Augusta, GA, 30912-2697, USA.
Jay HegdéDepartment of Neuroscience and Regenerative Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, CA-2003, 1469 Laney Walker Blvd, Augusta, GA, 30912-2697, USA. jhegde@augusta.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5596-2878

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Camouflage-breaking is a special case of visual search where an object of interest, or target, can be hard to distinguish from the background even when in plain view. We have previously shown that naive, non-professional subjects can be trained using a deep learning paradigm to accurately perform a camouflage-breaking task in which they report whether or not a given camouflage scene contains a target. But it remains unclear whether such expert subjects can actually detect the target in this task, or just vaguely sense that the two classes of images are somehow different, without being able to find the target per se. Here, we show that when subjects break camouflage, they can also localize the camouflaged target accurately, even though they had received no specific training in localizing the target. The localization was significantly accurate when the subjects viewed the scene as briefly as 50 ms, but more so when the subjects were able to freely view the scenes. The accuracy and precision of target localization by expert subjects in the camouflage-breaking task were statistically indistinguishable from the accuracy and precision of target localization by naive subjects during a conventional visual search where the target 'pops out', i.e., is readily visible to the untrained eye. Together, these results indicate that when expert camouflage-breakers detect a camouflaged target, they can also localize it accurately.

Indexed as

Pattern Recognition, VisualHumansAccuracyCategorizationPop-outPrecisionVisual search

Identifiers

PMID33825054
PMCPMC8024432

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.