What can cytologists learn from 25 years of investigations in visual search?

British Journal of Biomedical Science

Volumn 62, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 182-192

  Evered, Andrew ^a  

^a LLANDOUGH HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cytology; Visual perception

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CYTOLOGY; HUMAN; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICOLEGAL ASPECT; PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; SCREENING; STAFF; TECHNOLOGY; TRAINING; VISION;

EID: 29144519359     PISSN: 09674845     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09674845.2005.11732709     Document Type: Review

References (125)

1. Fitzgerald MJT. Neuroanatomy. London: WB Saunders, 1996.
2. Wolfe JW. What can 1 million trials tell us about visual search? Psychological Science 1998; 9: 33-9.
3. Treisman A, Gelade G. A feature integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology 1980; 12: 97-136.
4. Duncan J, Humphreys GW. Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review 1989; 96: 433-58.
5. Wolfe JM. Guide search 2.0: a revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 1994; 1: 202-38.
6. Wolfe JM. Moving towards some enduring controversies in visual search. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2003; 7: 70-6.
7. Wolfe JM, Butcher SJ, Lee C, Hyle M. Changing your mind: on the contributions of top-down and bottom-up guidance in visual search feature singletons. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 2003; 29: 483-502.
8. Kastner S, Ungerleider LG. Mechanisms of visual attention in the human cortex. Annu Rev Neurosci 2000; 23: 315-41.
9. Przybyszewski AW. Vision: does top-down processing help us to see? Curr Biol 1998; 8: 135-9.
10. Carrasco M, McElree B. Covert attention accelerates the rate of visual information processing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001; 98: 5363-7.
11. Hoffman JE. Visual attention and eye movements. In: Pashler H, ed. Attention. East Sussex: Psychology Press, 1998: 119-53.
12. Williams DE, Reingold EM, Moscovitch M, Behrmann M. Patterns of eye movements during parallel and serial visual search tasks. Can J Exp Psychol 1997; 51: 151-64.
13. Samuel S, Kundel HL et al. Mechanism of satisfaction of search: eye position recordings in the reading of chest radiographs. Radiology 1995; 194: 895-902.
14. Di Russo F, Pitzalis S, Spinelli D. Fixation stability and saccadic latency in elite shooters. Vision Res 2003; 43: 1837-45.
15. Al-Abood SA, Bennett SJ, Hernandez FM et al. Effect of verbal instructions and image size on visual search strategies in basketball free throw shooting. J Sports Sci 2002; 20: 271-8.
16. Kato T, Fukuda T. Visual search strategies of baseball batters: eye movements during the preparatory phase of batting. Percept Mot Skills 2002; 94: 380-6.
17. Luoma J. Perception and eye movements in simulated traffic situations. Acta Ophthalmol 1984; 161 (Suppl): 128-34.
18. Rezec AA, Dobkins KR. Attentional weighting: a possible account of visual field asymmetries in visual search? Spat Vis 2004; 17: 269-93.
19. Steinman SB, Steinman BA. Vision and attention. I: Current models of visual attention. Optom Vis Sci 1998; 75: 146-55.
20. Wolfe JM, Horowitz TS. What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it? Nature Reviews 2004; 5: 1-7.
21. Johnson J, Patnick J. Achievable standards, benchmarks for reporting and criteria for evaluating cervical cytopathology (2nd edn). Sheffield: NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, 2000 (NHSCSP Publication No.1).
22. Schenk U, Reuter B et al. Investigation of the visual cytoscreening of conventional smears: I. Analysis of slide movement. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 1986; 1: 35-45.
23. Reuter B, Schenck U. Investigation of the visual cytoscreening of conventional smears: II. Analysis of eye movement. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 1986; 8: 210-8.
24. Kundel HL, Nodine CF et al. Searching for lung nodules: the guidance of visual scanning. Invest Radiol 1991; 26: 777-81.
25. Nodine CF, Kundel HL et al. Nature of expertise in searching mammograms for breast masses. Acad Radiol 1996; 3: 1000-6.
26. Bravo MJ, Farid H. Search for a category target in clutter. Perception 2004; 33: 643-52.
27. Hogeboom M, van Leeuwen C. Visual search strategy and perceptual organization covary with individual preference and structural complexity. Acta Psychol (Amst) 1997; 95: 141-64.
28. Carter JE, Obier L, Woodward S, Albert ML. The effect of increasing age on the latency for saccadic eye movements. J Gerontol 1983; 3: 318-20.
29. Andrews TJ, Coppola DM. Idiosyncratic characteristics of saccadic eye movements when viewing different visual environments. Vision Research 1999; 17: 2947-53.
30. Chun MM, Wolfe JM. Just say no: how are visual searches terminated when there is no target present? Cognit Psychol 1996; 30: 39-78.
31. Laboratory organisation: a guide for laboratories participating in the NHS cervical screening programme. Sheffield: NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, 2003 (NHSCSP Publication No.14).
32. Posner MI. Chronometric explorations of mind. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA, 1978.
33. Humphreys GW. Flexibility of attention between stimulus dimensions. Percept Psychophys 1981; 30: 291-302.
34. Bertera JH, Rayner K. Eye movements and the span of the effective stimulus in visual search. Percept Psychophys 2000; 62: 576-85.
35. Mackworth NH. Stimulus density limits the useful field of view. In: Monty RA, Senders JW. Hillsdale, NJ, eds. Eye movements and psychological processes. 1976, 307-20.
36. Hoffman JE, Nelson B. Spatial selectivity in visual search. Percept Psychophys 1981; 30: 283-90.
37. Green HH, Rayner K. Eye movements and familiarity effects in visual search. Vision Res 2001; 41: 3763-73.
38. Oken BS, Kishiyama SS, Kaye JA, Jones DE. Age-related differences in global-local processing: stability of laterality differences but disproportionate impairment in global processing. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 1999; 12: 76-81.
39. Ball K, Beard BL, Roenker DL, Miller RL, Griggs DS. Age and visual search: expanding the useful field of view. J Optical Society of America 1988; 5: 2210-9.
40. Green CS, Bavelier D. Action video game modifies visual attention. Nature 2003; 423: 534-7.
41. Ball K, Owsley C, Sloane ME, Roenker DL, Bruni JR. Visual attention problems as a predictor of vehicle crashes among older drivers. Invest Ophthalmol Visual Sci 1993; 34: 3110-23.
42. McLeod P, Driver J et al. Visual search for conjunctions of movement and form is parallel. Nature 1988; 332: 154-5.
43. McLeod P, Driver J et al. Filtering by movement in visual search. J Exp Psychol: Hum Percept Perform 1991; 17: 55-64.
44. Royden CS, Wolfe JM et al. Visual search asymmetries in motion and optic flow fields. Percept Psychophys 2001; 63: 436-44.
45. National Institute for Clinical Excellence: Final Appraisal Determination. Guidance on the use of liquid-based cervical screening. Review of existing guidance No. 5. 2003. www.nice.org.uk/pdf/fad_lbc.pdf
46. Rosenholtz R, Nagy AL, Bell NR. The effect of background color on asymmetries in color search. J Vision 2004; 4: 224-40.
47. Theeuwes J, Kooi JL. Parallel search for a conjunction of shape and contrast polarity. Vision Res 1994; 34: 3013-6.
48. Gilchrist ID, Humphreys GW, Riddoch MJ. Grouping and extinction: evidence for low-level modulation of visual selection. Cognit Neuropsychol 1996; 13: 1223-49.
49. Shapley R. The importance of contrast for the activity of single neurons, the VEP and perception. Vision Res 1986; 26: 45-61.
50. Nasanen R, Ojanpaa H, Kojo I. Effect of stimulus contrast on performance and eye movements in visual search. Vision Res 2001; 41: 1817-24.
51. Wacker J, Buser A, Lachenmayr BJ. Influence of stimulus size and contrast on the temporal parameters of saccadic eye movements: implications for road traffic. Ger J Ophthalmol 1993; 2: 246-50.
52. O'Brien BA, Mansfield JS, Legge GE. The effect of contrast on reading speed in dyslexia. Vision Res 2000; 40: 1921-35
53. Gibson BS, Egeth H. Inhibition of return to object-based and environment-based locations. Percept Psychophys 1994; 55: 323-39.
54. Tipper SP, Driver J, Weaver B. Object-centred inhibition of return of visual attention. Quart J Exp Psychol 1991; 43A: 289-98.
55. Wolfe JM, Oliva A, Horowitz TS, Butcher SJ, Bompas A. Segmentation of objects from backgrounds in visual search tasks. Vision Res 2002; 42: 2985-3004.
56. Intriligator J, Cavanagh P. The spatial resolution of visual attention. Cognit Psychol 2001; 43: 171-216.
57. He S, Cavanagh P, Intriligator J. Attentional resolution and the locus of visual awareness. Nature 1996; 383: 334-7.
58. Cohen I, Ivry RB. Density effects in conjunction search: evidence for a coarse location mechanism of feature integration. J Exp Psychol: Hum Percept Perform 1991; 17: 891-901.
59. Motter BC, Belky EJ. The zone of focal attention during active visual search. Vision Res 1998; 38: 1007-22.
60. Stringer SM, Rolls ET. Position invariant recognition in the visual system with cluttered environments. Neural Netw 2000; 13: 305-15.
61. Schlesinger BY, Yeshurun Y. Spatial size limits in stereoscopic vision. Spat Vis 1998; 11: 279-93.
62. De Gennaro L, Ferrara M, Curcio G, Bertini M. Visual search performance across 40 hours of continuous wakefulness: measures of speed and accuracy and relation with oculomotor performance. Physiol Behav 2001; 74: 197-204.
63. Madden DJ, Allen PA. Aging and the speed/accuracy relation in visual search: evidence for an accumulator model. Optom Vis Sci 1995; 72: 210-6.
64. Madden DJ, Blumenthal JA. Interaction of hypertension and age in visual selective attention performance. Health Psychol 1998; 17: 76-83.
65. Madden DJ, Allen PA. Adult age differences in the rate of information extraction during visual search. J Gerontol 1991; 46: 124-6.
66. Walsh DA. Aging and visual information processing: potential implications for everyday seeing. J Am Optom Assoc 1988; 59: 301-6.
67. Gorman MF, Fisher DL. Visual search tasks: slowing of strategic and nonstrategic processes in the nonlexical domain. Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 1998; 53: 189-200.
68. Treisman A, Gormican S. Feature analysis in early vision: evidence from search asymmetries. Psychol Rev 1988; 95: 15-48.
69. Wolfe JM. Asymmetries in visual search: an introduction. Percept Psychophys 2001; 63: 381-9.
70. Wolfe JM. In a blink of the mind's eye. Nature 1997; 387: 756-7.
71. Raymond JE, Shapiro KL, Arnell KM. Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: an attentional blink? J Exp Psychol: Hum Percept Perform 1992; 18: 849-60.
72. Chun MM, Potter MC. A two-stage model for multiple target detection in rapid serial visual presentation. J Exp Psychol: Hum Percept Perform 1995; 21: 109-27.
73. Isaak MI, Shapiro KL, Martin J. The attentional blink reflects retrieval competition among multiple rapid serial visual presentation items: tests of an interference model. J Exp Psychol: Hum Percept Perform 1999; 25: 1774-92.
74. Berbaum KS, Franken EA Jr, Dorfman DD et al. Satisfaction of search in diagnostic radiology. Invest Radiol 1990; 25: 133-40.
75. Berbaum KS, Franken EA Jr, Dorfman DD et al. Time course of satisfaction of search. Invest Radiol 1991; 26: 640-8.
76. Wolfe JM, O'Neill P, Bennett SC. Why are there eccentricity effects in visual search? Visual and attentional hypotheses. Percept Psychophys 1998; 60: 140-56.
77. Carrasco M, McLean TL, Katz SM, Frieder KS. Feature asymmetries in visual search: effects of display duration, target eccentricity, orientation and spatial frequency. Vision Res 1998; 38: 347-74.
78. Johnson CA, Keltner JL, Balestrery F. Effects of target size and eccentricity on visual detection and resolution. Vision Res 1978; 18: 1217-22.
79. Carrasco M, Evert DL, Chang I, Katz SM. The eccentricity effect: target eccentricity affects performance on conjunction searches. Percept Psychophys 1995; 57: 1241-61.
80. Smith PA, Turnbull LS. Small cell and 'pale' dyskaryosis. Cytopathology 1997; 8: 3-8.
81. Mitchell H, Medley G. Differences between Papanicolaou smears with correct and incorrect diagnoses. Cytopathology 1995; 6: 368-75.
82. Legge GE, Rubin GS, Luebker A. Psychophysics of reading: V The role of contrast in normal vision. Vision Res 1987; 27: 1165-77.
83. Harley EM, Dillon AM, Loftus GR. Why is it difficult to see in the fog? How stimulus contrast affects visual perception and visual memory. Psychon Bull Rev 2004; 11: 197-231.
84. Fiser J, Bex PJ, Makous W. Contrast conservation in human vision. Vision Res 2003; 43: 2637-48.
85. Papanicolaou GN. A new procedure for staining vaginal smears. Science 1942; 95: 438-9.
86. Poller DN, Willis BH, Codling BW. Search tasks in human visual perception: relevance to diagnosis of cervical small cell and pale dyskaryosis and other cytological specimens (Letter). Acta Cytol 1996; 40: 851-3.
87. Nodine CF, Krupinski EA, Kundel HL, Toto L, Herman GT. Satisfaction of search (SOS). Invest Radiol 1992; 27: 571-3.
88. Fiorentini A, Berardi N. Perceptual learning specific for orientation and spatial frequency. Nature 1980; 287: 43-4.
89. Saarinen J, Levi DM. Perceptual learning in Vernier acuity: what is learned? Vision Res 1995; 35: 519-27.
90. Dorais A, Sagi D. Contrast masking effects change with practice. Vision Res 1997; 37: 1725-33.
91. Fahle M. Specificity of learning curvature, orientation, and Vernier discriminations. Vision Res 1997; 37: 1885-95.
92. Crist RE, Kapadia MK, Westheimer G, Gilbert CD. Perceptual learning of spatial localisation: specificity for orientation, position, and context. J Neurophysiol 1997; 78: 2889-94.
93. Fine I, Jacobs RA. Perceptual learning for a pattern discrimination task. Vision Res 2000; 40: 3209-30.
94. Sowden PT, Rose D, Davies IR. Perceptual learning of luminance contrast discrimination. Specificity for spatial frequency and retinal location but not orientation. Vision Res 2002; 42: 1249-58.
95. Yu C, Klein SA, Levi DM. Perceptual learning in contrast discrimination and the (minimal) role of context. J Vision 2004; 4: 169-82.
96. Menneer T, Barrett DJ, Phillips L, Donnelly N, Cave KR. The effect of training on search for complex stimuli. J Vision 2004; 4: 338-45.
97. Bennett RG, Westheimer G. The effect of training on visual alignment discrimination and grating resolution. Percept Psychophys 1991; 49: 541-6.
98. Long GM, Riggs CA. Training effects on dynamic visual acuity with free-head viewing. Perception 1991; 20: 363-71.
99. Reisberg D, Baron J, Kemler DG. Overcoming Stroop interference: the effects of practice on distractor potency. J Exp Psychol: Hum Percept Perform 1980; 6: 140-50.
100. Westheimer G. Is peripheral visual acuity susceptible to perceptual learning in the adult? Vision Res 2001; 41: 47-52.
101. Fahle M, Henke-Fahle S. Inter-observer variance in perceptual performance and learning. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1996; 37: 869-77.
102. Whitaker LA. Effects of training on response latency and accuracy for a difficult visual discrimination. Percept Mot Skills 1981; 52: 475-8.
103. Fahle M. Human pattern recognition: parallel processing and perceptual learning. Perception 1994; 23: 411-27.
104. Fahle M. Visual learning in the hyperacuity range in adults. Ger J Ophthalmol 1993; 2: 83-6.
105. Beard BL, Levi DM, Reich LN. Perceptual learning in parafoveal vision. Vision Res 1995; 35: 1679-90.
106. Leonards U, Rettenbach R, Nase G, Sireteanu R. Perceptual learning of highly demanding visual search tasks. Vision Res 2002; 42: 2193-204.
107. Sireteanu R, Rettenbach R. Perceptual learning in visual search: fast, enduring, but non-specific. Vision Res 1995; 35: 2037-43.
108. Pavlovskaya M, Ring H, Groswasser Z, Keren O, Hochstei S. Visual search in peripheral vision: learning effects and set-size dependence. Spat Vis 2001; 14: 151-73.
109. Boersema T, Zwaga HJ. Pop-out in visual search requires practice. Percept Mot Skills 1996; 82: 355-65.
110. Pratt J, Abrams RA, Chasteen AL. Initiation and inhibition of saccadic eye movements in younger and older adults: an analysis of the gap effect. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 1997; 52: 103-7.
111. Faubert J. Visual perception and aging. Can J Exp Psychol 2002; 56: 164-76.
112. Sekuler R, Ball K. Visual localization: age and practice. J Opt Soc Am A 1986; 3: 864-7.
113. Geldmacher DS, Riedel TM. Age effects on random-array letter cancellation tests. Neuropsych Neuropsychol Behav Neurol 1999; 12: 28-34.
114. Scialfa CT, Esau SP, Joffe KM. Age, target-distractor similarity and visual search. Exp Aging Res 1998; 24: 337-58.
115. Scialfa CT, Thomas DM. Age differences in same-different judgments as a function of multidimensional similarity. J Gerontol 1994; 49: 173-8.
116. Coeckelbergh TR, Cornelissen FW, Brouwer WH, Kooijman AC. The effect of visual field defects on eye movements and practical fitness to drive. Vision Res 2002; 42: 669-77.
117. Bertera JH. The effect of simulated scotomas on visual search in normal subjects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1988; 29: 470-5.
118. Sprenger A, Kompf D, Heide W. Visual search in patients with left visual hemineglect. Prog Brain Res 2002; 140: 395-416.
119. Conlon E, Humphreys L. Visual search in migraine and visual discomfort groups. Vision Res 2001; 41: 3063-8.
120. Rizzo M, Hurtig R. The effect of bilateral visual cortex lesions on the development of eye movements and perception. Neurology 1989; 39: 406-13.
121. Cowey A. Sensory and non-sensory visual disorders in man and monkey. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 1982; 298: 3-13.
122. Horridge GA. The evolution of visual processing and the construction of seeing systems. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 1987; 230: 279-92.
123. Cliff D, Noble J. Knowledge-based vision and simple visual machines. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 1997; 352: 1165-75.
124. Opara R, Worgotter F. Using visual latencies to improve image segmentation. Neural Comput 1996; 8: 1493-520.
125. Rosenfeld A. Computer vision: a source of models for biological visual process? IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1989; 36: 93-6.