Visual similarity is stronger than semantic similarity in guiding visual search for numbers

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 689-695

  Godwin, Hayward J ^a   Hout, Michael C ^b   Menneer, Tamaryn ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^b NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Eye movements; Visual search

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ATTENTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; OCULOGRAPHY; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; SEMANTICS; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; ATTENTION; EYE MOVEMENT MEASUREMENTS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; SEMANTICS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84901315953     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-013-0547-4     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Alexander, R. G., & Zelinsky, G. J. (2011). Visual similarity effects in categorical search. Journal of Vision, 11(8), 9. doi: 10. 1167/11. 8. 9. 1-15.
2. Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes [Software]. Retrieved from http://CRAN. R-project. org/package=lme4.
3. Becker, S. I. (2011). Determinants of dwell time in visual search: Similarity of perceptual difficulty? PLoS One, 6, e17740. doi: 10. 1371/journal. pone. 0017740.
4. Busing, F. M. T. A., Commandeur, J. J. F., Heiser, W. J., Bandilla, W., & Faulbaum, F. (1997). PROXSCAL: A multidimensional scaling program for individual differences scaling with constraints. Advances in Statistical Software, 6, 67-73.
5. 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. doi: 10. 1006/cogp. 1996. 0002.
6. Cohen, D. J., & Blanc-Goldhammer, D. (2012). Numerical bias in bounded and unbounded number line tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 331-338. doi: 10. 3758/s13423-011-0059-z.
7. Goldstone, R. L. (1994). An efficient method for obtaining similarity data. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 26, 381-386. doi: 10. 3758/BF03204653.
8. Henderson, J. M., Malcolm, G. L., & Schandl, C. (2009). Searching in the dark: Cognitive relevance drives attention in real-world scenes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 850-856. doi: 10. 3758/PBR. 16. 5. 850.
9. Hout, M. C., Goldinger, S. D., & Ferguson, R. W. (2013). The versatility of SpAM: A fast, efficient spatial method of data collection for multidimensional scaling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142, 256-281. doi: 10. 1037/a0028860.
10. Hout, M. C., Papesh, M. H., & Goldinger, S. D. (2012). Multidimensional scaling. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 4, 93-103. doi: 10. 1002/wcs. 1203.
11. Jaworska, N., & Chupetlovska-Anastasova, A. (2009). A review of multidimensional scaling (MDS) and its utility in various psychological domains. Tutorial in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 5, 1-10.
12. Luria, S. M., & Strauss, M. S. (1975). Eye movements during search for coded and uncoded targets. Perception & Psychophysics, 17, 303-308. doi: 10. 3758/BF03203215.
13. Oliva, A., & Torralba, A. (2007). The role of context in object recognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 520-527. doi: 10. 1016/j. tics. 2007. 09. 009.
14. Rayner, K., & Fisher, D. L. (1987). Letter processing during eye fixations in visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 42, 87-100. doi: 10. 3758/BF03211517.
15. Schwarz, W., & Eiselt, A.-K. (2012). Numerical distance effects in visual search. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74, 1098-1103. doi: 10. 3758/s13414-012-0342-8.
16. Shepard, R. N., Kilpatric, D. W., & Cunningham, J. P. (1975). The internal representation of numbers. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 82-138. doi: 10. 1016/0010-0285(75)90006-7.
17. Stroud, M. J., Menneer, T., Cave, K. R., & Donnelly, N. (2012). Using the dual-target cost to explore the nature of search target representations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 113-122. doi: 10. 1037/a0025887.
18. Williams, L. G. (1967). The effects of target specification on objects fixated during visual search. Acta Psychologica, 27, 355-360. doi: 10. 1016/0001-6918(67)90080-7.
19. 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 and Performance, 15, 419-433. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 15. 3. 419.
20. Wolfe, J. M., & Horowitz, T. S. (2004). What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, 495-501. doi: 10. 1038/nrn1411.
21. Wolfe, J. M., Võ, M. L.-H., Evans, K. K., & Greene, M. R. (2011). Visual search in scenes involves selective and nonselective pathways. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 77-84. doi: 10. 1016/j. tics. 2010. 12. 001.