Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35073315›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2022

Foraging as sampling without replacement: A Bayesian statistical model for estimating biases in target selection.

Alasdair D F Clarke, Amelia R Hunt, Anna E Hughes

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. FoMo: A unifying theory of visual foraging.PLoS computational biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The effect of target scarcity on visual foraging.Royal Society open science · 2024
    Article
  8. Research on re-searching: interrupted foraging is not disrupted foraging.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Visual search habits and the spatial structure of scenes.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Alasdair D F ClarkeUniversity of Essex, Department of Psychology, Colchester, United Kingdom.
Amelia R HuntUniversity of Aberdeen, School of Psychology, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4122-9499
Anna E HughesUniversity of Essex, Department of Psychology, Colchester, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2677-1965

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Foraging entails finding multiple targets sequentially. In humans and other animals, a key observation has been a tendency to forage in 'runs' of the same target type. This tendency is context-sensitive, and in humans, it is strongest when the targets are difficult to distinguish from the distractors. Many important questions have yet to be addressed about this and other tendencies in human foraging, and a key limitation is a lack of precise measures of foraging behaviour. The standard measures tend to be run statistics, such as the maximum run length and the number of runs. But these measures are not only interdependent, they are also constrained by the number and distribution of targets, making it difficult to make inferences about the effects of these aspects of the environment on foraging. Moreover, run statistics are underspecified about the underlying cognitive processes determining foraging behaviour. We present an alternative approach: modelling foraging as a procedure of generative sampling without replacement, implemented in a Bayesian multilevel model. This allows us to break behaviour down into a number of biases that influence target selection, such as the proximity of targets and a bias for selecting targets in runs, in a way that is not dependent on the number of targets present. Our method thereby facilitates direct comparison of specific foraging tendencies between search environments that differ in theoretically important dimensions. We demonstrate the use of our model with simulation examples and re-analysis of existing data. We believe our model will provide deeper insights into visual foraging and provide a foundation for further modelling work in this area.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremModels, StatisticalAppetitive BehaviorBiasComputational BiologyHumans

Identifiers

PMID35073315
PMCPMC8812991

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.