ArticleScientific reports2024
Using a flashlight-contingent window paradigm to investigate visual search and object memory in virtual reality and on computer screens.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measuring the dynamics of attentional capture in hand and eye movements with virtual reality.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Eye-Tracking-Based Evaluation of Visual Search Efficiency in Simulated VR Menu Interfaces: Effects of Card Layout Structure and Target Spatial Quadrant.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Self-Generated Expectations of Hazard Prevalence Affect Virtual Search and Rescue.Human factors · 2026Article
- Spatial Learning in Naturalistic Search With Simulated Vision Loss.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
A popular technique to modulate visual input during search is to use gaze-contingent windows. However, these are often rather discomforting, providing the impression of visual impairment. To counteract this, we asked participants in this study to search through illuminated as well as dark three-dimensional scenes using a more naturalistic flashlight with which they could illuminate the rooms. In a surprise incidental memory task, we tested the identities and locations of objects encountered during search. Importantly, we tested this study design in both immersive virtual reality (VR; Experiment 1) and on a desktop-computer screen (Experiment 2). As hypothesized, searching with a flashlight increased search difficulty and memory usage during search. We found a memory benefit for identities of distractors in the flashlight condition in VR but not in the computer screen experiment. Surprisingly, location memory was comparable across search conditions despite the enormous difference in visual input. Subtle differences across experiments only appeared in VR after accounting for previous recognition performance, hinting at a benefit of flashlight search in VR. Our findings highlight that removing visual information does not necessarily impair location memory, and that screen experiments using virtual environments can elicit the same major effects as VR setups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.