Examining eye movements in visual search through clusters of objects in a circular array

Abstract

Participants were asked to search for a complete O in an array consisting of eight clusters of four Landolt Cs (i.e., Os with a gap) arranged in a ring. The size of the gap in the Cs varied from cluster to cluster but was held constant within a cluster. The manual response time data were consistent with a serial self-terminating search. More importantly, eye movement data supported a serial processing model as (a) clusters were fixated serially (either clockwise or counterclockwise) on most trials and (b) fixation times on a cluster reflected processing time on that cluster and were unaffected by the gap size of either the prior or succeeding cluster. Furthermore, the pattern of fixation times on a cluster was similar to the pattern of response times in a secondary task where a single cluster was presented at fixation. These data extend the findings of Williams and Pollatsek (2007) in which search was through a linear sequence of clusters, and indicate that a serial search pattern through clusters of these kinds of objects is not confined to reading-like linear arrays.

Auditory word recognition across the lifespan

“…Bilingual inhibition advantages have not always been identified (e.g., Blumenfeld & Marian, 2014; Hilchey & Klein, 2011), although they appear more frequently in older adults (e.g., Hilchey & Klein, but see Kirk et al, 2014). Our objective was not to identify a bilingual advantage (a task that typically requires larger samples), but to identify relationships between nonlinguistic and linguistic cognitive control.…”

“…Perhaps due to the competition resolution demands of bilingual processing, bilinguals may demonstrate fine-grained benefits over monolinguals in cognitive control (e.g., Bialystok, 2007; Bialystok, Craik, Klein, & Viswanathan, 2004; Bialystok, Craik, & Luk, 2008; Gold et al, 2013; Kroll & Bialystok, 2013, but see Hilchey & Klein, 2011; Kirk, Fiala, Scott-Brown, & Kempe, 2014; Paap & Greenberg, 2013). A possible source of enhanced cognitive control during bilingual processing is bilinguals’ simultaneous activation of both languages (e.g., Bartolotti & Marian, 2012; Blumenfeld & Marian, 2007, 2013; Green, 1998; Kroll & Bialystok, 2013; Kroll, Bobb, Misra, & Guo, 2008; Kroll, Dussias, Bogulski, & Valdes Kroff, 2012; Martín, Macizo, & Bajo, 2010).…”

The relationship between working memory and the dual-target cost in visual search guidance.

“…Models of fixation data in visual search are typically used to understand what attracts eye movements and guides attention (e.g., Henderson, Malcolm, & Schandl, 2009;J. Wolfe & Gancarz, 1997;Zelinsky, 2008), or to understand the processes driving eye movement behaviour (e.g., Godwin, Reichle, & Menneer, 2014;Williams, Pollatsek, & Reichle, 2014).…”

Spatial partitions systematize visual search and enhance target memory

“…There are several good reasons to believe that such partitioning might influence search. First, it has long been known that grouping or otherwise regularizing the configuration of items in search displays can facilitate target detection and improve efficiency (e.g., Bundesen & Pedersen, 1983;Farmer & Taylor, 1980;Humphreys, Quinlan, & Riddoch, 1989;Treisman, 1982;Williams, Pollatsek, & Reichle, 2014). Second, there is evidence that visual attention is typically deployed in a coarse-tofine ordering: selecting groups first, then homing in on individual objects within them (e.g., Rao, Zelinsky, Hayhoe, & Ballard, 2002;Zelinsky, Rao, Hayhoe, & Ballard, 1997).…”

“…One explanation for this result is that partitions, like other forms of grouping, enable more systematic processing of the items in the display (cf. Williams et al, 2014), thereby avoiding attentional inefficiencies such as retracing searched locations or dwelling on and reinspecting items that have already been examined.…”