Homo economicus in visual search

Journal of Vision

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2009, Pages

  Navalpakkam, Vidhya ^a   Koch, Christof ^a   Perona, Pietro ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Computational modeling; Detection; Learning; Reward; Search; Target rarity; Visual cognition

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMAN; LEARNING; METHODOLOGY; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; REWARD; TIME; VISION;

ADULT; ATTENTION; COMPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; LEARNING; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REWARD; TIME FACTORS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 58849121459     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15347362     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/9.1.31     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Bogacz, R., Brown, E., Moehlis, J., Holmes, P., & Cohen, J. D. (2006). The physics of optimal decision making: A formal analysis of models of performance in two-alternative forced-choice tasks. Psychological Review, 113, 700-765.
2. Braun, J. (1994). Visual search among items of different salience: Removal of visual attention mimics a lesion in extrastriate area V4. Journal of Neuroscience, 14, 554-567.
3. Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433-458.
4. Eckstein, M. P., Shimozaki, S. S., & Abbey, C. K. (2002). The footprints of visual attention in the Posner cueing paradigm revealed by classification images. Journal of Vision, 2(1):3, 25-45, http://journalofvision.org/2/1/3/, doi:10.1167/2.1.3.
5. Fleck, M. S., & Mitroff, S. R. (2007). Rare targets are rarely missed in correctable search. Psychological Science, 18, 943-947.
6. Gold, J. I., & Shadlen, M. N. (2007). The neural basis of decision making. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 30, 535-574.
7. Goldstone, R. L. (1998). Perceptual learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 585-612.
8. Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
9. Gur, D., Sumkin, J. H., Rockette, H. E., Ganott, M., Hakim, C., Hardesty, L., et al. (2004). Changes in breast cancer detection and mammography recall rates after the introduction of a computer-aided detection system. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 96, 185-190.
10. Healy, A. F., & Kubovy, M. (1981). Probability matching and the formation of conservative decision rules in a numerical analog of signal detection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 7, 344-354.
11. Itti, L., & Koch, C. (2001). Computational modelling of visual attention. Nature Reviews, Neuroscience, 2, 194-203.
12. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-292.
13. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (2000). Choices, Values, and Frames. New York: Cambridge University Press.
14. Kubovy, M., & Healy, A. F. (1977). The decision rule in probabilistic categorization: What it is and how it is learned. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 106, 427-466.
15. Lee, W., & Janke, M. (1964). Categorizing externally distributed stimulus samples for three continua. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 376-382.
16. Lee, W., & Janke, M. (1965). Categorizing externally distributed stimulus samples for unequal molar probabilities. Psychological Reports, 17, 79-90.
17. Lee, W., & Zentall, T. R. (1966). Factorial effects in the categorization of externally distributed stimulus samples. Perception & Psychophysics, 1, 120-124.
18. Navalpakkam, V., & Itti, L. (2007). Search goal tunes visual features optimally. Neuron, 53, 605-617.
19. Nothdurft, H. C. (1992). Feature analysis and the role of similarity in preattentive vision. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, 355-375.
20. Palmer, J., Ames, C. T., & Lindsey, D. T. (1993). Measuring the effect of attention on simple visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 108-130.
21. Palmer, J., Verghese, P., & Pavel, M. (2000). The psychophysics of visual search. Vision Research, 40, 1227-1268.
22. Parasuraman, R. (1986). Vigilance, monitoring, and search (vol. 2). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
23. Rosenholtz, R. (2001). Search asymmetries? What search asymmetries? Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 476-489.
24. Rubenstein, J. (2001). Test and evaluation plan: X-ray image screener selection test. Washington, DC: Office of Aviation Research (No. DOT/ FAA/AR-01/47).
25. Schoonveld, W., Shimozaki, S. S., & Eckstein, M. P. (2007). Optimal observer model of single-fixation oddity search predicts a shallow set-size function. Journal of Vision, 7(10):1, 1-16, http://journalofvision.org/7/10/1/, doi:10.1167/7.10.1.
26. Sugrue, L. P., Corrado, G. S., & Newsome, W. T. (2005). Choosing the greater of two goods: Neural currencies for valuation and decision making. Nature Reviews, Neuroscience, 6, 363-375.
27. Maddox, W. T. (2002). Toward a unified theory of decision criterion learning in perceptual categorization. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 78, 567-595.
28. Treisman, A. M., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136.
29. Trommershäuser, J., Maloney, L. T., & Landy, M. S. (2003). Statistical decision theory and the selection of rapid, goal-directed movements. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, Optics, Image Science, and Vision, 20, 1419-1433.
30. Verghese, P. (2001). Visual search and attention: A signal detection theory approach. Neuron, 31, 523-535.
31. Verghese, P., & Stone, L. S. (1995). Combining speed information across space. Vision Research, 35, 2811-2823.
32. Vickery, T. J., King, L. W., & Jiang, Y. (2005). Setting up the target template in visual search. Journal of Vision, 5(1):8, 81-92, http://journalofvision.org/5/1/8/, doi:10.1167/5.1.8.
33. von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1953). Theory of games and economic behavior. New York: Princeton University Press.
34. Warm, J. S. (1993). Vigilance and target detection. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
35. Wolfe, J. M., Horowitz, T. S., & Kenner, N. M. (2005). Cognitive psychology: Rare items often missed in visual searches. Nature, 435, 439-440.
36. Wolfe, J. M., Horowitz, T. S., Van Wert, M. J., Kenner, N. M., Place, S. S., & Kibbi, N. (2007). Low target prevalence is a stubborn source of errors in visual search tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 623-638.