Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35675057›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2022

Could simplified stimuli change how the brain performs visual search tasks? A deep neural network study.

David A Nicholson, Astrid A Prinz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

David A NicholsonEmory University, Department of Biology, O. Wayne Rollins Research Center, Atlanta, Georgia.
Astrid A PrinzEmory University, Department of Biology, O. Wayne Rollins Research Center, Atlanta, Georgia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Visual search is a complex behavior influenced by many factors. To control for these factors, many studies use highly simplified stimuli. However, the statistics of these stimuli are very different from the statistics of the natural images that the human visual system is optimized by evolution and experience to perceive. Could this difference change search behavior? If so, simplified stimuli may contribute to effects typically attributed to cognitive processes, such as selective attention. Here we use deep neural networks to test how optimizing models for the statistics of one distribution of images constrains performance on a task using images from a different distribution. We train four deep neural network architectures on one of three source datasets-natural images, faces, and x-ray images-and then adapt them to a visual search task using simplified stimuli. This adaptation produces models that exhibit performance limitations similar to humans, whereas models trained on the search task alone exhibit no such limitations. However, we also find that deep neural networks trained to classify natural images exhibit similar limitations when adapted to a search task that uses a different set of natural images. Therefore, the distribution of data alone cannot explain this effect. We discuss how future work might integrate an optimization-based approach into existing models of visual search behavior.

Indexed as

BrainNeural Networks, ComputerAttentionHumans

Identifiers

PMID35675057
PMCPMC9187944

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.