When is it time to move to the next raspberry bush? Foraging rules in human visual search

Journal of Vision

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2013, Pages

  Wolfe, Jeremy M ^a  

^a HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision rules; Foraging; Marginal value theorem; Visual attention; Visual search

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DECISION RULES; FORAGING; HUMAN; MARGINAL VALUE THEOREM; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; SHORT TERM MEMORY; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL ATTENTION; VISUAL SEARCH;

DECISION RULES; FORAGING; MARGINAL VALUE THEOREM; VISUAL ATTENTION; VISUAL SEARCH;

ATTENTION; HUMANS; MEMORY, SHORT-TERM; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS;

EID: 84878347197     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15347362     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/13.3.10     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Beck, V. M., Hollingworth, A.,& Luck, S. J. (2012). Simultaneous control of attention by multiple working memory representations. Journal of Vision, 12(9), 956, http://www.journalofvision.org/content/ 12/9/956, doi:10.1167/12.9.956. [Abstract]
2. Bond, A. B., & Kamil, A. C. (2002). Visual predators select for crypticity and polymorphism in virtual prey. Nature, 415(6872), 609-613.
3. Cain, M. S., Vul, E., Clark, K., & Mitroff, S. R. (2011). A Bayesian optimal foraging model of human visual search. Psychological Science, 23, 1047-1054. doi:doi:10.1177/0956797612440460.
4. Charnov, E. L. (1976). Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. Theoretical Population Biology, 9, 129-136.
5. Eckstein, M. P. (2011). Visual search: A retrospective. Journal of Vision, 11(5):14, 1-36, http://www.journalofvision.org/content/11/5/14. doi:10.1167/11.5.14. [PubMed] [Article]
6. Ehinger, K. A., Hidalgo-Sotelo, B., Torralba, A., & Oliva, A. (2009). Modelling search for people in 900 scenes: A combined source model of eye guidance. Visual Cognition, 17(6), 945-978.
7. Elazary, L., & Itti, L. (2010). A Bayesian model for efficient visual search and recognition. Vision Research, 50(14), 1338-1352. doi:10.1016/j.visres. 2010.01.002.
8. Glimcher, P. W., & Rustichini, A. (2004). Neuroeconomics: The consilience of brain and decision. Science, 306(5695), 447-452.
9. Hills, T. T. (2006). Animal foraging and the evolution of goal-directed cognition. Cognitive Science, 30, 3- 41.
10. Hills, T. T., Jones, M. N., & Todd, P. M. (2012). Optimal foraging in semantic memory. Psychological Review, 119(2), 431-440. doi:10.1037/a0027373.
11. Hutchinson, J. M. C., 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, 1331-1349. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav. 2007.09.006.
12. Klein, R. M., & MacInnes, W. J. (1999). Inhibition of return is a foraging facilitator in visual search. Psychological Science, 10(July), 346-352.
13. Mack, A., Tang, B., Tuma, R., & Kahn, S. (1992). Perceptual organization and attention. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 475-501.
14. Maljkovic, V., & Nakayama, K. (1994). Priming of popout: I. Role of features. Memory & Cognition, 22(6), 657-672.
15. Mayr, U., & Kliegl, R. (2000). Task-set switching and long-term memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26(5), 1124-1140.
16. Mozer, M. C., & Baldwin, D. (2008). Experienceguided search: A theory of attentional control. In D. K. J. Platt & Y. Singer (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 1033-1040). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17. Nakayama, K., & Martini, P. (2011). Situating visual search. Vision Research, 51(13), 1526-1537. doi:10. 1016/j.visres.2010.09.003.
18. Pierce, G. J., & Ollason, J. G. (1987). Eight reasons why optimal foraging theory is a complete waste of time. Oikos, 49, 111-118.
19. Pirolli, P. (1997). Computational models of informationscent follow in a very large browsable text collection. Paper presented at the CHI 1997 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Atlanta, GA.
20. Pirolli, P. (2007). Information foraging theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
21. Pirolli, P., & Card, S. (1999). Information foraging. Psychological Review, 106(4), 643-675.
22. Posner, M. I., & Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of attention. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X (pp. 55-66). Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Pyke, G. H., Pulliam, H. R., & Charnov, E. L. (1977). Optimal foraging: A selective review of theory and tests. Quarterly Review of Biology, 52(2), 137-154.
24. Rangelov, D., Muller, H. J., & Zehetleitner, M. (2011). Dimension-specific intertrial priming effects are task-specific: Evidence for multiple weighting systems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 37(1), 100-114. doi: 10.1037/a0020364.
25. Smith, A. D., Hood, B. M., & Gilchrist, I. D. (2008). Visual search and foraging compared in a largescale search task. Cognitive processing (Vol. 9, pp. 121-126). Heidelberg: Springer.
26. Smith, T. J., & Henderson, J. M. (2011). Looking back at Waldo: Oculomotor inhibition of return does not prevent return fixations. Journal of Vision, 11(1):3, 1-11, http://www.journalofvision.org/content/11/1/3. doi:10.1167/11.1.3. [PubMed] [Article]
27. Stephens, D. W., Brown, J. S., & Ydenberg, R. C. (2007). Foraging: Behavior and ecology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28. Stephens, D. W., & Krebs, J. R. (1986). Foraging theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
29. Thomas, L. E., Ambinder, M. S., Hsieh, B., Levinthal, B., Crowell, J. A., Irwin, D. E., et al. (2005). Fruitful visual search: Inhibition of return in a virtual foraging task. Psychological Bulletin & Review, 13(5), 891-895.
30. Thornton, T. L., & Gilden, D. L. (2007). Parallel and serial processes in visual search. Psychological Review, 114(1), 71-103.
31. Townsend, J. T., & Wenger, M. J. (2004). The serialparallel dilemma: A case study in a linkage of theory and method. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(3), 391-418.
32. Verghese, P. (2001). Visual search and attention: A signal detection approach. Neuron, 31, 523-535.
33. Viswanathan, G. M., Buldrev, S. V., Havlin, S., Da Luz, M. G. E., & Stanley, H. E. (1999). Optimizing the success of random searches. Nature, 401, 911- 914.
34. Wilke, A., Hutchinson, J. M. C., Todd, P. M., & Czienskowski, U. (2009). Fishing for the right words: Decision rules for human foraging behavior in internal search tasks. Cognitive Science, 33(3), 497-529. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01020.x.
35. Wolfe, J., Horowitz, T., Kenner, N. M., Hyle, M., & Vasan, N. (2004). How fast can you change your mind? The speed of top-down guidance in visual search. Vision Research, 44(12), 1411-1426.
36. Wolfe, J. M. (1998). Visual search. In H. Pashler (Ed.), Attention (pp. 13-74). Hove, East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press Ltd.
37. Wolfe, J. M. (2007). Guided search 4.0: Current progress with a model of visual search. In W. Gray (Ed.), Integrated models of cognitive systems (pp. 99-119). New York: Oxford University Press.
38. Wolfe, J. M. (2010). Visual search. Current Biology, 20(8), R346-R349. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2010.02.016.
39. Wolfe, J. M. (2012a). Approaches to visual search: Feature Integration Theory and Guided Search 2012. In S. Kastner (Ed.), Oxford handbook of attention. New York: Oxford University Press.
40. Wolfe, J. M. (2012b). Saved by a log: How do humans perform hybrid visual and memory search?. Psychological Science, 23(7), 698-703. doi:doi:10.1177/0956797612443968.
41. Wolfe, J. M. (2012c). Visual search. In P. M. Todd, T. T. Hills, & T. W. Robbins (Eds.), Cognitive search: Evolution, algorithms, and the brain (pp. 159-176). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42. Wolfe, J. M., Cave, K. R., & Franzel, S. L. (1989). Guided Search: An alternative to the Feature Integration model for visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 15, 419-433.
43. Wolfe, J. M., & Reynolds, J. H. (2008). Visual search. In A. I. Basbaum, A. Kaneko, G. M. Shepherd, & G. Westheimer (Eds.), The senses: A comprehensive reference (Vol. 2, Vision II, pp. 275-280). San Diego: Academic Press.
44. Zelinsky, G. (2008). A theory of eye movements during target acquisition. Psychological Review, 115(4), 787-835.