降低低流行率效应:相似性搜索是否转化为二元决策?

IF 1.7 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY
Greer Gillies, Anna Kosovicheva
{"title":"降低低流行率效应:相似性搜索是否转化为二元决策?","authors":"Greer Gillies, Anna Kosovicheva","doi":"10.3758/s13414-025-03084-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In visual search, observers often miss rare targets. This low prevalence effect (LPE) is resistant to many cognitive interventions. However, a recent study showed that having participants identify the item that was most similar to the target (similarity search) eliminated the LPE. As real-world searches often require binary decisions (e.g., is there a threat in this bag?) we tested whether the benefits of similarity search generalize to binary decisions and to more naturalistic stimuli. Participants searched for T shapes amongst near-T distractors and the prevalence of true Ts was manipulated. In the similarity-search-only condition, participants clicked on the \"most T-like object.\" In the similarity search & binary decision condition, participants additionally reported whether the chosen item was a true T (yes/no). We found that in some circumstances, similarity search can be used to attenuate the LPE. However, there was an LPE for the binary decision task. Participants were less likely to classify the target as a true T during low prevalence compared with high. We replicated this result in an additional experiment using more naturalistic stimuli. Participants watched clips of road videos and clicked on the \"most hazardous location\" in the video, followed by a binary decision (\"would you need to respond to that hazard? yes/no\"). Though participants located the hazards regardless of prevalence, there was an LPE for the binary decision task. Together, these results indicate potential limitations in applying similarity search outside the laboratory; the LPE is still seen in these searches if a binary decision is involved.</p>","PeriodicalId":55433,"journal":{"name":"Attention Perception & Psychophysics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reducing the low prevalence effect: Does similarity search translate to binary decisions?\",\"authors\":\"Greer Gillies, Anna Kosovicheva\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13414-025-03084-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In visual search, observers often miss rare targets. This low prevalence effect (LPE) is resistant to many cognitive interventions. However, a recent study showed that having participants identify the item that was most similar to the target (similarity search) eliminated the LPE. As real-world searches often require binary decisions (e.g., is there a threat in this bag?) we tested whether the benefits of similarity search generalize to binary decisions and to more naturalistic stimuli. Participants searched for T shapes amongst near-T distractors and the prevalence of true Ts was manipulated. In the similarity-search-only condition, participants clicked on the \\\"most T-like object.\\\" In the similarity search & binary decision condition, participants additionally reported whether the chosen item was a true T (yes/no). We found that in some circumstances, similarity search can be used to attenuate the LPE. However, there was an LPE for the binary decision task. Participants were less likely to classify the target as a true T during low prevalence compared with high. We replicated this result in an additional experiment using more naturalistic stimuli. Participants watched clips of road videos and clicked on the \\\"most hazardous location\\\" in the video, followed by a binary decision (\\\"would you need to respond to that hazard? yes/no\\\"). Though participants located the hazards regardless of prevalence, there was an LPE for the binary decision task. Together, these results indicate potential limitations in applying similarity search outside the laboratory; the LPE is still seen in these searches if a binary decision is involved.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Attention Perception & Psychophysics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Attention Perception & Psychophysics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-025-03084-9\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Attention Perception & Psychophysics","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-025-03084-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在视觉搜索中,观察者经常会错过一些罕见的目标。这种低流行率效应(LPE)对许多认知干预具有抗性。然而,最近的一项研究表明,让参与者识别与目标最相似的物品(相似性搜索)可以消除LPE。由于现实世界的搜索通常需要二元决策(例如,这个袋子里有威胁吗?),我们测试了相似性搜索的好处是否可以推广到二元决策和更自然的刺激。参与者在接近T的干扰物中搜索T形,并操纵真T形的流行程度。在只搜索相似的条件下,参与者点击了“最像t的物体”。在相似性搜索和二元决策条件下,参与者额外报告所选项目是否为真T(是/否)。我们发现,在某些情况下,相似性搜索可以用来减弱LPE。然而,对于二元决策任务,存在一个LPE。与高患病率相比,在低患病率期间,参与者不太可能将目标分类为真T。我们在另一个实验中使用更自然的刺激重复了这一结果。参与者观看道路视频片段,点击视频中“最危险的位置”,然后做出一个二元决策(“你需要对那个危险做出反应吗?”是/否”)。尽管参与者发现了危害而不考虑患病率,但二元决策任务有一个LPE。总之,这些结果表明了在实验室之外应用相似性搜索的潜在局限性;如果涉及到二进制决策,在这些搜索中仍然可以看到LPE。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reducing the low prevalence effect: Does similarity search translate to binary decisions?

In visual search, observers often miss rare targets. This low prevalence effect (LPE) is resistant to many cognitive interventions. However, a recent study showed that having participants identify the item that was most similar to the target (similarity search) eliminated the LPE. As real-world searches often require binary decisions (e.g., is there a threat in this bag?) we tested whether the benefits of similarity search generalize to binary decisions and to more naturalistic stimuli. Participants searched for T shapes amongst near-T distractors and the prevalence of true Ts was manipulated. In the similarity-search-only condition, participants clicked on the "most T-like object." In the similarity search & binary decision condition, participants additionally reported whether the chosen item was a true T (yes/no). We found that in some circumstances, similarity search can be used to attenuate the LPE. However, there was an LPE for the binary decision task. Participants were less likely to classify the target as a true T during low prevalence compared with high. We replicated this result in an additional experiment using more naturalistic stimuli. Participants watched clips of road videos and clicked on the "most hazardous location" in the video, followed by a binary decision ("would you need to respond to that hazard? yes/no"). Though participants located the hazards regardless of prevalence, there was an LPE for the binary decision task. Together, these results indicate potential limitations in applying similarity search outside the laboratory; the LPE is still seen in these searches if a binary decision is involved.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
17.60%
发文量
197
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics is an official journal of the Psychonomic Society. It spans all areas of research in sensory processes, perception, attention, and psychophysics. Most articles published are reports of experimental work; the journal also presents theoretical, integrative, and evaluative reviews. Commentary on issues of importance to researchers appears in a special section of the journal. Founded in 1966 as Perception & Psychophysics, the journal assumed its present name in 2009.
×
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