Sit-and-Wait Strategies in Dynamic Visual Search

The role of memory in visual search has lately become a controversial issue. Horowitz and Wolfe (1998) observed that performance in a visual search task was little affected by whether the stimuli were static or randomly relocated every 111 ms. Because a memory-based mechanism, such as inhibition of return, would be of no use in the dynamic condition, Horowitz and Wolfe concluded that memory is likewise not involved in the static condition. However, Horowitz and Wolfe could not effectively rule out the possibility that observers adopted a different strategy in the dynamic condition than in the static condition. That is, in the dynamic condition observers may have attended to a subregion of the display and waited for the target to appear there (sit-and-wait strategy). This hypothesis is supported by experimental data showing that performance in their dynamic condition does not differ from performance in another dynamic condition in which observers are forced to adopt a sit-and-wait strategy by being presented with a limited region of the display only

When are abrupt onsets found efficiently in complex visual search? : evidence from multi-element asynchronous dynamic search

Previous work has found that search principles derived from simple visual search tasks do not necessarily apply to more complex search tasks. Using a Multielement Asynchronous Dynamic (MAD) visual search task, in which high numbers of stimuli could either be moving, stationary, and/or changing in luminance, Kunar and Watson (M. A Kunar & D. G. Watson, 2011, Visual search in a Multi-element Asynchronous Dynamic (MAD) world, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, Vol 37, pp. 1017-1031) found that, unlike previous work, participants missed a higher number of targets with search for moving items worse than for static items and that there was no benefit for finding targets that showed a luminance onset. In the present research, we investigated why luminance onsets do not capture attention and whether luminance onsets can ever capture attention in MAD search. Experiment 1 investigated whether blinking stimuli, which abruptly offset for 100 ms before reonsetting-conditions known to produce attentional capture in simpler visual search tasks-captured attention in MAD search, and Experiments 2-5 investigated whether giving participants advance knowledge and preexposure to the blinking cues produced efficient search for blinking targets. Experiments 6-9 investigated whether unique luminance onsets, unique motion, or unique stationary items captured attention. The results found that luminance onsets captured attention in MAD search only when they were unique, consistent with a top-down unique feature hypothesis. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved)

When are abrupt onsets found efficiently in complex visual search? : evidence from multi-element asynchronous dynamic search

Previous work has found that search principles derived from simple visual search tasks do not necessarily apply to more complex search tasks. Using a Multielement Asynchronous Dynamic (MAD) visual search task, in which high numbers of stimuli could either be moving, stationary, and/or changing in luminance, Kunar and Watson (M. A Kunar & D. G. Watson, 2011, Visual search in a Multi-element Asynchronous Dynamic (MAD) world, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, Vol 37, pp. 1017-1031) found that, unlike previous work, participants missed a higher number of targets with search for moving items worse than for static items and that there was no benefit for finding targets that showed a luminance onset. In the present research, we investigated why luminance onsets do not capture attention and whether luminance onsets can ever capture attention in MAD search. Experiment 1 investigated whether blinking stimuli, which abruptly offset for 100 ms before reonsetting-conditions known to produce attentional capture in simpler visual search tasks-captured attention in MAD search, and Experiments 2-5 investigated whether giving participants advance knowledge and preexposure to the blinking cues produced efficient search for blinking targets. Experiments 6-9 investigated whether unique luminance onsets, unique motion, or unique stationary items captured attention. The results found that luminance onsets captured attention in MAD search only when they were unique, consistent with a top-down unique feature hypothesis. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved)

Over-reassurance and undersupport after a 'false alarm': a systematic review of the impact on subsequent cancer symptom attribution and help seeking

This literature review examined research into the impact of a previous 'all-clear' or non-cancer diagnosis following symptomatic presentation ('false alarm') on symptom attribution and delays in help seeking for subsequent possible cancer symptoms