Comparison of Anticipatory Glancing and Risk Mitigation of Novice Drivers and Exemplary Drivers when Approaching Curves

Novice drivers are overrepresented in run-off-the-road crashes. Indeed, the previous literature demonstrates that novice drivers are less likely to anticipate hazards or maintain attention to the forward roadway and as a result fail to mitigate hazards by slowing. This research was an effort to compare the linked hazard anticipation and hazard mitigation behaviors of novice drivers with exemplary experienced drivers at curves, locations that are known to have a greater crash risk. Each driver navigated three drives in a driving simulator, one of which included a moderate curve left and one of which included a tightening curve right. Experienced drivers made more anticipatory glances and began slowing significantly earlier in the curves than did novice drivers. However, novice drivers who anticipated hazards were much more likely to also mitigate the hazard. The use of these results in a PC-based driver hazard mitigation training program will be discussed

Encoding multiple words simultaneously in reading is implausible

Several prominent models of reading posit that attention is distributed to support the parallel lexical processing of multiple words. We contend that the auxiliary assumptions underlying this attention-gradient hypothesis are not well founded. Here, we address three specific issues related to the ongoing debate about attention allocation during reading: (i) why the attention-gradient hypothesis is widely endorsed, (ii) why processing several words in parallel in reading is implausible and (iii) why attention must be allocated to only one word at a time. Full consideration of these arguments supports the hypothesis that attention is allocated serially during reading

Eye movements and memory for objects and their locations

In this paper we briefly describe preliminary data from two experiments that we have carried out to investigate the relationship between visual encoding and memory for objects and their locations within scenes. In these experiments, we recorded participants’ eye movements as they viewed a photograph of a cubicle with 12 objects positioned pseudo-randomly on a desk and shelves. After viewing the photograph, participants were taken to the actual cubicle where they undertook two memory tasks. The participants were asked to identify the 12 target objects (from the photograph) presented amongst 12 distractors. They were then given the 12 target objects and were required to place each of them in the location that they occupied in the photograph. These tests assessed participants’ memory for identity of the objects and their locations. In Experiment 1, we assessed the influence of the encoding period and the test delay on object identity and location memory. In Experiment 2, we manipulated scanning behaviour during encoding by “boxing” some of the objects in the photo. We showed that using boxes to change eye movement behaviour during encoding directly affected the nature of memory for the scene. The results of these studies indicate a fundamental relationship between visual encoding and memory for objects and their locations. We explain our findings in terms of the Visual Memory Model (Hollingworth & Henderson, 2002)

Eye movements and non-canonical reading: comments on Kennedy and Pynte (2008)

Kennedy and Pynte [Kennedy, A., & Pynte, J. (2008). The consequences of violations to reading order: An eye movement analysis. Vision Research, 48, 2309–2320] presented data that they suggested pose problems for models of eye movement control in reading in which words are encoded serially. They focus on situations in which pairs of words are fixated out of order (i.e., the first word is skipped and the second fixated prior to a regression back to the first word). We strongly disagree with their claims and contest their arguments. We argue that their data set was obtained selectively and the events they believe are problematic do not occur frequently during reading. Furthermore, we do not consider that Kennedy and Pynte’s arguments pose serious difficulties for serial models of reading such as E-Z Reade

Using eye movements to evaluate a PC-based risk awareness and perception training program on a driving simulator

447-46