Cognitive-Aware Modality Allocation in Intelligent Multimodal Information Presentation

Cao, Yujia; Theune, Mariët; Nijholt, Anton

doi:10.1007/978-1-84996-507-1_3

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, a brief summary of this chapter is given in Section 3.7. The contents of this chapter has been partially published in [37] and [41].…”

Section: Modality and Human Cognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multimodal information presentation for high load human computer interaction

Cao¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Finally, a brief summary of this chapter is given in Section 3.7. The contents of this chapter has been partially published in [37] and [41].…”

Section: Modality and Human Cognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We also demonstrate a way to integrate these theories into a computational model that systematically predicts the suitability of any modality combination for our presentation task. The contents of this chapter have been published in [39], [40] and [41]. This chapter is organized as follows.…”

Section: Information Presentation For Time Limited Visual Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multimodal information presentation for high load human computer interaction

Cao¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impact of Evidence Type and Judicial Warning on Juror Perceptions of Global and Specific Witness Evidence

Wheatcroft

Keogan

2016

The Journal of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Court of Appeal in England and Wales held (R. v. Sardar, 2012) there had been no exceptional circumstances that justified a jury retiring with a transcript of the complainant's interview. This paper reports an investigation into the impact multiple evidence forms and use of a judicial warning has on juror evaluations of a witness. The warning focuses juror attention on placing disproportionate weight on the evidence as opposed to their general impression of it. Sixty jury-eligible participants were presented with witness evidence in transcript, video, or transcript plus video format. Half the participants in each condition received the warning. All mock jurors completed a questionnaire which assessed perceptions of witness and task. Outcomes showed that transcript plus video evidence, when accompanied by a warning, did impact on mock jurors' global assessments of the witness. The warning made the task less clear for jurors and, in the video condition, led to higher ratings of how satisfactory and reliable the witness was. Findings support the provision of a judicial warning to jurors and show some initial support for judiciary opposition to the provision of an additional transcript only when jurors are asked to make the more usual global witness assessments.

show abstract

Auditory Versus Visual Interruptions: A Skeptical Perspective on Auditory Preemption and Suggestions for Advancing Theory

Nees

2024

Auditory Perception & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auditory preemption applies to the case where a person is engaged in an ongoing visual task and intermittently is required to engage in an additional discrete task. Some research has suggested that an interruption from an auditory discrete task is more damaging to the ongoing visual task than an equivalent interruption from a visual discrete task-a phenomenon that has been described formally as Auditory Preemption Theory. In this critical comment, I review the definition and history of the notion of auditory preemption and survey the most cited literature that has purported to show auditory preemption. I argue that the foundational evidence of auditory preemption has been characterized by shortcomings that weaken or preclude the conclusion that auditory preemption occurred. I argue there is little evidence that the effect described by Auditory Preemption Theory is a modality effect-findings across laboratory studies appear approximately consistent with what would be expected due to sampling error if no auditory preemption effects exists. Plausible alternate candidates to explain phenomena that have been attributed to auditory preemption include startle responses, cognitive demands associated with speech generation in communication tasks, and possibly social demands associated with human communications. Suggestions from the open science movement to improve methods and theory are applied to the problem of building theories of interruptions modalities. These suggestions include methodological reforms and making more explicit auxiliary assumptions about theories.

show abstract

Cognitive-Aware Modality Allocation in Intelligent Multimodal Information Presentation

Cited by 4 publications

References 58 publications

Multimodal information presentation for high load human computer interaction

Multimodal information presentation for high load human computer interaction

Impact of Evidence Type and Judicial Warning on Juror Perceptions of Global and Specific Witness Evidence

Auditory Versus Visual Interruptions: A Skeptical Perspective on Auditory Preemption and Suggestions for Advancing Theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About