Joint contributions of preview and task instructions on visual search strategy selection

被引:2
作者
Zhang, Tianyu [1 ]
Irons, Jessica L. [2 ]
Hansen, Heather A. [1 ]
Leber, Andrew B. [1 ]
机构
[1] Ohio State Univ, Dept Psychol, 225 Psychol Bldg,1835 Neil Ave, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[2] CSIRO, Data61, Eveleigh, Australia
关键词
Attentional control; Visual search; Strategy; Individual differences; COGNITIVE CONTROL; GUIDANCE; TIME;
D O I
10.3758/s13414-024-02870-1
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
People tend to employ suboptimal attention control strategies during visual search. Here we question why people are suboptimal, specifically investigating how knowledge of the optimal strategies and the time available to apply such strategies affect strategy use. We used the Adaptive Choice Visual Search (ACVS), a task designed to assess attentional control optimality. We used explicit strategy instructions to manipulate explicit strategy knowledge, and we used display previews to manipulate time to apply the strategies. In the first two experiments, the strategy instructions increased optimality. However, the preview manipulation did not significantly boost optimality for participants who did not receive strategy instruction. Finally, in Experiments 3A and 3B, we jointly manipulated preview and instruction with a larger sample size. Preview and instruction both produced significant main effects; furthermore, they interacted significantly, such that the beneficial effect of instructions emerged with greater preview time. Taken together, these results have important implications for understanding the strategic use of attentional control. Individuals with explicit knowledge of the optimal strategy are more likely to exploit relevant information in their visual environment, but only to the extent that they have the time to do so.
引用
收藏
页码:1163 / 1175
页数:13
相关论文
共 41 条
  • [1] Experimental methods: When and why contextual instructions are important
    Alekseev, Aleksandr
    Charness, Gary
    Gneezy, Uri
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION, 2017, 134 : 48 - 59
  • [2] The cost of a voluntary task switch
    Arrington, CM
    Logan, GD
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2004, 15 (09) : 610 - 615
  • [3] Goal-directed guidance of attention: Evidence from conjunctive visual search
    Bacon, WF
    Egeth, HE
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 1997, 23 (04) : 948 - 961
  • [4] OVERRIDING STIMULUS-DRIVEN ATTENTIONAL CAPTURE
    BACON, WF
    EGETH, HE
    [J]. PERCEPTION & PSYCHOPHYSICS, 1994, 55 (05): : 485 - 496
  • [5] Stable individual differences in search strategy?: The effect of task demands and motivational factors on scanning strategy in visual search
    Boot, Walter R.
    Becic, Ensar
    Kramer, Arthur F.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF VISION, 2009, 9 (03):
  • [6] Conflict monitoring and cognitive control
    Botvinick, MM
    Braver, TS
    Barch, DM
    Carter, CS
    Cohen, JD
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2001, 108 (03) : 624 - 652
  • [7] Braver T. S., 2007, VARIATION WORKING ME, V75, P76, DOI [DOI 10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780195168648.003.0004, 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195168648.003]
  • [8] THE NEED FOR COGNITION
    CACIOPPO, JT
    PETTY, RE
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1982, 42 (01) : 116 - 131
  • [9] A Bayesian Optimal Foraging Model of Human Visual Search
    Cain, Matthew S.
    Vul, Edward
    Clark, Kait
    Mitroff, Stephen R.
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2012, 23 (09) : 1047 - 1054
  • [10] Pupillometric and behavioral markers of a developmental shift in the temporal dynamics of cognitive control
    Chatham, Christopher H.
    Frank, Michael J.
    Munakata, Yuko
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2009, 106 (14) : 5529 - 5533