An Optimal Foraging Model of Human Visual Search

Expanding the Space of Cognitive Science - Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, CogSci 2011

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 184-189

  Cain, Matthew S ^a   Clark, Kait ^a   Mitroff, Stephen R ^a   Vul, Ed ^b  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayesian modeling; Optimal foraging theory; Visual search

Indexed keywords

BAYESIAN; BAYESIAN MODELLING; FORAGING MODEL; HUMAN VISUAL; LABORATORY EXPERIMENTS; MULTIPLE TARGETS; OPTIMAL FORAGING THEORY; REAL-WORLD; SEARCH STRATEGIES; VISUAL SEARCH;

BAYESIAN NETWORKS;

EID: 84862670224     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. Berbaum, K. S., Franklin, E. A. Jr., Caldwell, R. T., & Schartz, K. M. (2010). Satisfaction of Search in Traditional Radiographic Imaging. In E. Samei & E. Krupinski (Eds.), The Handbook of Medical Image Perception and Techniques. Cambridge University Press.
2. Charnov, E. (1976). Optimal foraging: The marginal value theorem. Theoretical Population Biology, 9(2), 129–136.
3. Fleck, M. S., Samei, E., & Mitroff, S. R. (2010). Generalized ‘satisfaction of search’: Adverse influences on dual-target search accuracy. J. of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 16(1), 60–71.
4. Godwin, H., Menneer, T., Cave, K., & Donnelly, N. (2010). Dual-target search for high and low prevalence X-ray threat targets. Visual Cognition, 18(10), 1439–1463.
5. Horowitz, T. S., & Wolfe, J. M. (2001). Search for multiple targets: Remember the targets, forget the search. Perception & Psychophysics, 63(2), 272.
6. Hutchinson, J. M., Wilke, A., & Todd, P. M. (2008). Patch leaving in humans: can a generalist adapt its rules to dispersal of items across patches? Animal Behaviour, 75(4), 1331–1349.
7. Lau, J. S., & Huang, L. (2010). The prevalence effect is determined by past experience, not future prospects. Vision Research, 50, 1469–1474.
8. McNamara, J. (1982). Optimal patch use in a stochastic environment. Theoretical Population Biology, 21(2), 269–288.
9. Nakayama, K., & Martini, P. (2010). Situating visual search. Vision Research,
10. Olsson, O., & S. Brown, J. (2006). The foraging benefits of information and the penalty of ignorance. Oikos, 112(2), 260–273.
11. Pirolli, P. (2007). Information foraging theory: adaptive interaction with information. New York, NY: Oxford University Press US.
12. Stephens, D. W., & Krebs, J. R. (1986). Foraging Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
13. 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(4), 623-638.
14. Wolfe, J. M., & Van Wert, M. J. (2010). Varying Target Prevalence Reveals Two Dissociable Decision Criteria in Visual Search. Current Biology, 20(2), 121–124.