ArticleScientific reports2025
Contributions of distractor dwelling, skipping, and revisiting to age differences in visual search.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- REAsmash-ET: a methodological framework for combined cognitive and motor assessment through eye-tracking and kinematic metrics in immersive VR search-and-reach task.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Reducing cognitive demand fails to mitigate choice overload: Multimodal neural and gaze evidence for effort conservation.iScience · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Visual search becomes slower with aging, particularly when targets are difficult to discriminate from distractors. Multiple distractor rejection processes may contribute independently to slower search times: dwelling on, skipping of, and revisiting of distractors, measurable by eye-tracking. The present study investigated how age affects each of the distractor rejection processes, and how these contribute to the final search times in difficult (inefficient) visual search. In a sample of Dutch healthy adults (19-85 years), we measured reaction times and eye-movements during a target present/absent visual search task, with varying target-distractor similarity and visual set size. We found that older age was associated with longer dwelling and more revisiting of distractors, while skipping was unaffected by age. This suggests that increased processing time and reduced visuo-spatial memory for visited distractor locations contribute to age-related decline in visual search. Furthermore, independently of age, dwelling and revisiting contributed stronger to search times than skipping of distractors. In conclusion, under conditions of poor guidance, dwelling and revisiting have a major contribution to search times and age-related slowing in difficult visual search, while skipping is largely negligible.
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.