Likelihood Systems Can Improve Hit Rates in Low-Prevalence Visual Search Over Binary Systems.

IF 2.9 3区 心理学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Tobias Rieger, Benita Marx, Dietrich Manzey
{"title":"Likelihood Systems Can Improve Hit Rates in Low-Prevalence Visual Search Over Binary Systems.","authors":"Tobias Rieger, Benita Marx, Dietrich Manzey","doi":"10.1177/00187208251320589","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To study the performance consequences of binary versus likelihood decision support systems in low-prevalence visual search.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Hit rates in visual search are often low if target prevalence is low, an issue that is relevant for numerous real-world visual search tasks (e.g., luggage screening and medical imaging). Given that binary decision support systems produce many false alarms at low prevalence, they have often been discounted as a solution to this low-prevalence problem. By offering additional information about the certainty of target-present indications through splitting these into warnings and alarms, likelihood-based systems could potentially boost hit rates without raising the number of false alarms.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We used a simulated medical search task with low target prevalence in a paradigm where participants sequentially uncovered parts of the stimulus with their mouse. In two sessions, participants completed the task either while being supported by a binary or a likelihood system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Hit rates were higher when interacting with the likelihood systems than with the binary system, at no cost of higher false alarms.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Likelihood systems are a promising way to tackle the low-prevalence problem, and might further be an effective means to make systems more transparent.</p><p><strong>Application: </strong>Simple-to-process information about system certainty for each case might be a solution to low hit rates in domains with low target prevalence, such as radiology.</p>","PeriodicalId":56333,"journal":{"name":"Human Factors","volume":" ","pages":"187208251320589"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208251320589","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To study the performance consequences of binary versus likelihood decision support systems in low-prevalence visual search.

Background: Hit rates in visual search are often low if target prevalence is low, an issue that is relevant for numerous real-world visual search tasks (e.g., luggage screening and medical imaging). Given that binary decision support systems produce many false alarms at low prevalence, they have often been discounted as a solution to this low-prevalence problem. By offering additional information about the certainty of target-present indications through splitting these into warnings and alarms, likelihood-based systems could potentially boost hit rates without raising the number of false alarms.

Method: We used a simulated medical search task with low target prevalence in a paradigm where participants sequentially uncovered parts of the stimulus with their mouse. In two sessions, participants completed the task either while being supported by a binary or a likelihood system.

Results: Hit rates were higher when interacting with the likelihood systems than with the binary system, at no cost of higher false alarms.

Conclusion: Likelihood systems are a promising way to tackle the low-prevalence problem, and might further be an effective means to make systems more transparent.

Application: Simple-to-process information about system certainty for each case might be a solution to low hit rates in domains with low target prevalence, such as radiology.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Human Factors
Human Factors 管理科学-行为科学
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society publishes peer-reviewed scientific studies in human factors/ergonomics that present theoretical and practical advances concerning the relationship between people and technologies, tools, environments, and systems. Papers published in Human Factors leverage fundamental knowledge of human capabilities and limitations – and the basic understanding of cognitive, physical, behavioral, physiological, social, developmental, affective, and motivational aspects of human performance – to yield design principles; enhance training, selection, and communication; and ultimately improve human-system interfaces and sociotechnical systems that lead to safer and more effective outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信