Missed Targets Are More Frequent Than False Alarms: A Model for Error Rates in Visual Search

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 23, Issue 6, 1997, Pages 1783-1791

  Zenger, Barbara ^a   Fahle, Manfred ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; REACTION TIME; VISION;

HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PROBABILITY; REACTION TIME; SIGNAL DETECTION (PSYCHOLOGY); VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 0031302369     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.23.6.1783     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Chun, M., & Wolfe, J. (1996). Just say no: How are visual searches terminated when there is no target present. Cognitive Psychology, 30, 39-78.
2. Duncan, J. (1980). The demonstration of capacity limitation. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 75-96.
3. Enns, J., & Rensink, R. (1990). Influence of scene-based properties on visual search. Science, 247, 721-723.
4. Eriksen, C., & Spencer, T. (1969). Rate of information processing in visual perception: Some results and methodological considerations. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monographs, 79(2, Pt. 2).
5. Graham, N., Kramer, P., & Yager, D. (1987). Signal-detection models for multidimensional stimuli: Probability distributions and combination rules. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 31, 366-409.
6. Green, D., & Swets, J. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
7. Humphreys, G., Quinlan, P., & Riddoch, M. (1989). Grouping processes in visual search: Effects with single- and combined-feature targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 258-279.
8. Palmer, J. (1994). Set-size effects in visual search: The effect of attention is independent of the stimulus for simple tasks. Vision Research, 34, 1703-1721.
9. Palmer, J., Ames, T., & Lindsey, D. (1993). Measuring the effect of attention on simple visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 108-130.
10. Rensink, R., & Enns, J. (1995). Preemption effects in visual search: Evidence for low-level grouping. Psychological Review, 102, 101-130.
11. Treisman, A., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136.
12. Treisman, A., & Sato, S. (1990). Conjunction search revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 459-478.
13. Verghese, P., & Nakayama, K. (1994). Stimulus discriminability in visual search. Vision Research, 34, 2453-2467.
14. Wolfe, J. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1, 202-238.
15. Wolfe, J., Cave, K., & Franzel, S. (1989). Guided Search: An alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 419-433.
16. Zacks, J., & Zacks, R. (1993). Visual search times assessed without reaction times: A new method and an application to aging. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 798-813.