2014
DOI: 10.1080/20445911.2014.930042
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Event segmentation during first-person continuous events

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
24
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
0
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…SPECT does not account for visual narrative experience in which the viewer is also an active participant, such as video game and virtual reality experiences. Given that first‐person experiences are processed in similar fashion to narrative experiences (Magliano, Radvansky, Forsythe, & Copeland, ), SPECT should be able to accommodate these experiences. However, the fact that one is an active agent in many of these contexts will obviously have implications for attentional selection.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…SPECT does not account for visual narrative experience in which the viewer is also an active participant, such as video game and virtual reality experiences. Given that first‐person experiences are processed in similar fashion to narrative experiences (Magliano, Radvansky, Forsythe, & Copeland, ), SPECT should be able to accommodate these experiences. However, the fact that one is an active agent in many of these contexts will obviously have implications for attentional selection.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a result, the current event model is updated and this is experienced as an event boundary [8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14]. This can be revealed by explicitly asking people to indicate the boundaries between events during comprehension [15, 16]; this has been done for videos of everyday activities [17, 18], dance movements [19] and visual and written narratives [20, 21]. Event boundary identification is partially determined by conceptually driven factors, such as comprehenders’ current interests and attention [20], action predictability [21], and default expectations [22].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A hint of this kind of agnosticism to medium was seen in work described above, where mental maps are similar whether constructed from survey or route descriptions (Taylor & Tversky, 1992). Other work has compared models derived from text, movies, pictures, or even video games (Gernsbacher, Varner, & Faust, 1990;Magliano, Miller, & Zwaan, 2001;Magliano, Radvansky, Forsythe, & Copeland, 2014;Radvansky & Copeland, 2006), and found that such models exhibit similar properties. Similarly, manipulations affect cognition in similar ways across text reading and video representation, and such convergence across media that bear few surface similarities (e.g.…”
Section: Figure 2 An Example Of a Map That Participants Learned Witmentioning
confidence: 86%