A formal version of the guided search (GS2) model

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 63, Issue 6, 2001, Pages 945-951

  Hübner, Ronald ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KONSTANZ   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME;

EID: 0038972551     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03194514     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. CHUN, M. M., & WOLFE, J. M. (1996). Just say no: How are visual searches terminated when there is no target present? Cognitive Psychology, 30, 39-78.
2. DUNCAN, J., & HUMPHREYS, G.W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433-458.
3. DUNCAN, J., & HUMPHREYS, G. W. (1992). Beyond the search surface: Visual search and attentional engagement. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception & Performance, 18, 578-588.
4. GREEN, D. M., & SWETS, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
5. HÜBNER, R., & MALINOWSKI, P. (2001). How to produce an absent-advantage in visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 258-271.
6. HUMPHREYS, G. W., QUINLAN, P. T., & RIDDOCH, M. J. (1989). Grouping processes in visual search: Effects with single- and combined-feature targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 258-279.
7. MALINOWSKI, P., & HÜBNER, R. (2001). The effect of familiarity on visualsearch performance: Evidence for learned basic features. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 458-463.
8. MÜLLER, H. J., HUMPHREYS, G. W., & DONNELLY, N. (1994). Search via recursive rejection (SERR): Visual search for single and dual form-conjunction targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 235-258.
9. ROSS, S. (1981). Introduction to probability models. New York: Academic Press.
10. TREISMAN, A. (1988). Features and objects: The 14th Bartlett Memorial Lecture. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40A, 201-237.
11. TREISMAN, A., & GELADE, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136.
12. TREISMAN, A., & GORMICAN, S. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries. Psychological Review, 95, 15-48.
13. WANG, Q., CAVANAGH, P., & GREEN, M. (1994). Familiarity and pop-out in visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 56, 495-500.
14. WOLFE, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 202-238.
15. WOLFE, J. M. (1998). Visual search. In H. Pashler (Ed.), Attention (pp. 13-73). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
16. WOLFE, J. M., CAVE, K. R., & FRANZEL, S. L. (1989). Guided search: An alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. What can 1 million trials tell us about visual search? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception & Performance, 15, 419-433.
17. ZENGER, B., & FAHLE, M. (1997). Missed targets are more frequent than false alarms: A model for error rates in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 23, 1783-1791.