Examining the effects of passive and active strategies on behavior during hybrid visual memory search: evidence from eye tracking

Activated long-term memory and visual working memory during hybrid visual search: Effects on target memory search and distractor memory

In hybrid visual search, observers must maintain multiple target templates and subsequently search for any one of those targets. If the number of potential target templates exceeds visual working memory (VWM) capacity, then the target templates are assumed to be maintained in activated long-term memory (aLTM). Observers must search the array for potential targets (visual search), as well as search through memory (target memory search). Increasing the target memory set size reduces accuracy, increases search response times (RT), and increases dwell time on distractors. However, the extent of observers' memory for distractors during hybrid search is largely unknown. In the current study, the impact of hybrid search on target memory search (measured by dwell time on distractors, false alarms, and misses) and distractor memory (measured by distractor revisits and recognition memory of recently viewed distractors) was measured. Specifically, we aimed to better understand how changes in behavior during hybrid search impacts distractor memory. Increased target memory set size led to an increase in search RTs, distractor dwell times, false alarms, and target identification misses. Increasing target memory set size increased revisits to distractors, suggesting impaired distractor location memory, but had no effect on a two-alternative forced-choice (2AFC) distractor recognition memory test presented during the search trial. The results from the current study suggest a lack of interference between memory stores maintaining target template representations (aLTM) and distractor information (VWM). Loading aLTM with more target templates does not impact VWM for distracting information.

Framing the fallibility of Computer-Aided Detection aids cancer detection

Computer-Aided Detection (CAD) has been proposed to help operators search for cancers in mammograms. Previous studies have found that although accurate CAD leads to an improvement in cancer detection, inaccurate CAD leads to an increase in both missed cancers and false alarms. This is known as the over-reliance effect. We investigated whether providing framing statements of CAD fallibility could keep the benefits of CAD while reducing over-reliance. In Experiment 1, participants were told about the benefits or costs of CAD, prior to the experiment. Experiment 2 was similar, except that participants were given a stronger warning and instruction set in relation to the costs of CAD. The results showed that although there was no effect of framing in Experiment 1, a stronger message in Experiment 2 led to a reduction in the over-reliance effect. A similar result was found in Experiment 3 where the target had a lower prevalence. The results show that although the presence of CAD can result in over-reliance on the technology, these effects can be mitigated by framing and instruction sets in relation to CAD fallibility.

Same same but different: Subtle but consequential differences between two measures to linearly integrate speed and accuracy (LISAS vs. BIS)

Condition-specific speed-accuracy trade-offs (SATs) are a pervasive issue in experimental psychology, because they sometimes render impossible an unambiguous interpretation of experimental effects on either mean response times (mean RT) or percentage of correct responses (PC). For between-participants designs, we have recently validated a measure (Balanced Integration Score, BIS) that integrates standardized mean RT and standardized PC and thereby controls for cross-group variation in SAT. Another related measure (Linear Integrated Speed-Accuracy Score, LISAS) did not fulfill this specific purpose in our previous simulation study. Given the widespread and seemingly interchangeable use of the two measures, we here illustrate the crucial differences between LISAS and BIS related to their respective choice of standardization variance. We also disconfirm the recently articulated hypothesis that the differences in the behavior of the two combined performance measures observed in our previous simulation study were due to our choice of a between-participants design and we demonstrate why a previous attempt to validate BIS (and LISAS) for within-participants designs has failed, pointing out several consequential issues in the respective simulations and analyses. In sum, the present study clarifies the differences between LISAS and BIS, demonstrates that the choice of the variance used for standardization is crucial, provides further guidance on the calculation and use of BIS, and refutes the claim that BIS is not useful for attenuating condition-specific SATs in within-participants designs.

More scanning, but not zooming, is associated with diagnostic accuracy in evaluating digital breast pathology slides

Diagnoses of medical images can invite strikingly diverse strategies for image navigation and visual search. In computed tomography screening for lung nodules, distinct strategies, termed scanning and drilling, relate to both radiologists' clinical experience and accuracy in lesion detection. Here, we examined associations between search patterns and accuracy for pathologists (N = 92) interpreting a diverse set of breast biopsy images. While changes in depth in volumetric images reveal new structures through movement in the z-plane, in digital pathology changes in depth are associated with increased magnification. Thus, "drilling" in radiology may be more appropriately termed "zooming" in pathology. We monitored eye-movements and navigation through digital pathology slides to derive metrics of how quickly the pathologists moved through XY (scanning) and Z (zooming) space. Prior research on eye-movements in depth has categorized clinicians as either "scanners" or "drillers." In contrast, we found that there was no reliable association between a clinician's tendency to scan or zoom while examining digital pathology slides. Thus, in the current work we treated scanning and zooming as continuous predictors rather than categorizing as either a "scanner" or "zoomer." In contrast to prior work in volumetric chest images, we found significant associations between accuracy and scanning rate but not zooming rate. These findings suggest fundamental differences in the relative value of information types and review behaviors across two image formats. Our data suggest that pathologists gather critical information by scanning on a given plane of depth, whereas radiologists drill through depth to interrogate critical features.

Great expectations: minor differences in initial instructions have a major impact on visual search in the absence of feedback

Professions such as radiology and aviation security screening that rely on visual search-the act of looking for targets among distractors-often cannot provide operators immediate feedback, which can create situations where performance may be largely driven by the searchers' own expectations. For example, if searchers do not expect relatively hard-to-spot targets to be present in a given search, they may find easy-to-spot targets but systematically quit searching before finding more difficult ones. Without feedback, searchers can create self-fulfilling prophecies where they incorrectly reinforce initial biases (e.g., first assuming and then, perhaps wrongly, concluding hard-to-spot targets are rare). In the current study, two groups of searchers completed an identical visual search task but with just a single difference in their initial task instructions before the experiment started; those in the "high-expectation" condition were told that each trial could have one or two targets present (i.e., correctly implying no target-absent trials) and those in the "low-expectation" condition were told that each trial would have up to two targets (i.e., incorrectly implying there could be target-absent trials). Compared to the high-expectation group, the low-expectation group had a lower hit rate, lower false alarm rate and quit trials more quickly, consistent with a lower quitting threshold (i.e., performing less exhaustive searches) and a potentially higher target-present decision criterion. The expectation effect was present from the start and remained across the experiment-despite exposure to the same true distribution of targets, the groups' performances remained divergent, primarily driven by the different subjective experiences caused by each groups' self-fulfilling prophecies. The effects were limited to the single-targets trials, which provides insights into the mechanisms affected by the initial expectations set by the instructions. In sum, initial expectations can have dramatic influences-searchers who do not expect to find a target, are less likely to find a target as they are more likely to quit searching earlier.

Eye movements reflect expertise development in hybrid search

Domain-specific expertise changes the way people perceive, process, and remember information from that domain. This is often observed in visual domains involving skilled searches, such as athletics referees, or professional visual searchers (e.g., security and medical screeners). Although existing research has compared expert to novice performance in visual search, little work has directly documented how accumulating experiences change behavior. A longitudinal approach to studying visual search performance may permit a finer-grained understanding of experience-dependent changes in visual scanning, and the extent to which various cognitive processes are affected by experience. In this study, participants acquired experience by taking part in many experimental sessions over the course of an academic semester. Searchers looked for 20 categories of targets simultaneously (which appeared with unequal frequency), in displays with 0-3 targets present, while having their eye movements recorded. With experience, accuracy increased and response times decreased. Fixation probabilities and durations decreased with increasing experience, but saccade amplitudes and visual span increased. These findings suggest that the behavioral benefits endowed by expertise emerge from oculomotor behaviors that reflect enhanced reliance on memory to guide attention and the ability to process more of the visual field within individual fixations.