ArticleScientific reports2024
Eye and head movements in visual search in the extended field of view.
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- How field of view impacts visual search strategies.Journal of vision · 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
- Foveated light-field compound imager.Science advances · 2026Article
- Foveated Light-Field Compound Imager.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Spatial Guidance Overrides Dynamic Saliency in VR: An Eye-Tracking Study on Gestalt Grouping Mechanisms and Visual Attention Patterns.Journal of eye movement research · 2025Article
- Reduced field of view alters scanning behaviour.Virtual reality · 2025Article
- Impact of sports vision training on visuomotor skills and shooting performance in elite skeet shooters.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In natural environments, head movements are required to search for objects outside the field of view (FoV). Here we investigate the power of a salient target in an extended visual search array to facilitate faster detection once this item comes into the FoV by a head movement. We conducted two virtual reality experiments using spatially clustered sets of stimuli to observe target detection and head and eye movements during visual search. Participants completed search tasks with three conditions: (1) target in the initial FoV, (2) head movement needed to bring the target into the FoV, (3) same as condition 2 but the periphery was initially hidden and appeared after the head movement had brought the location of the target set into the FoV. We measured search time until participants found a more salient (O) or less salient (T) target among distractors (L). On average O's were found faster than T's. Gaze analysis showed that saliency facilitation occurred due to the target guiding the search only if it was within the initial FoV. When targets required a head movement to enter the FoV, participants followed the same search strategy as in trials without a visible target in the periphery. Moreover, faster search times for salient targets were only caused by the time required to find the target once the target set was reached. This suggests that the effect of stimulus saliency differs between visual search on fixed displays and when we are actively searching through an extended visual field.
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.