Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41219310›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Designing a test battery for real-world visual search.

Charli Sherman, Alasdair D F Clarke, Anna E Hughes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Charli ShermanDepartment of Psychology, University of Essex, Colchester, CO4 3SQ, UK.
Alasdair D F ClarkeDepartment of Psychology, University of Essex, Colchester, CO4 3SQ, UK.
Anna E HughesDepartment of Psychology, University of Essex, Colchester, CO4 3SQ, UK. anna.hughes@essex.ac.uk.

Funding

BA/Leverhulme SRG20\200356
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although much research has investigated the mechanisms of visual search behaviour in laboratory-based computer tasks, there has been relatively little work on whether these results generalise to more naturalistic search tasks. In addition, work on real-world search has often been carried out by researchers working in very different disciplines, leading to a high degree of task fragmentation. Here, we detail our development of a 'naturalistic search task battery', which aims to provide a suite of open-source, reproducible, and standardised real-world search tasks, thus enabling the generation of comparable data across multiple studies and aiding theory and modelling in this area. We show that we can replicate findings from previous search tasks using Lego, demonstrating set-size effects and differences between search conditions. We also show effects of scene regularity using a 'bookcase' task where participants search for specific books on shelves. Finally, we use a 'jigsaw' task and a 'Lego building' task as examples of more complex real-world search tasks and show how we can use them to consider the effects of strategies. Finally, we consider whether performance on one task can predict performance on another, and thus to what extent similar cognitive capabilities underlie diverse 'real-world' search tasks.

Indexed as

Real-world visual searchTask battery

Identifiers

PMID41219310
PMCPMC12606359

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.