psyc2013

More like this

SCIENCE

by qin siyuan

Artificial Intelligence

by vince nguyen

Market Economy

by Logan B

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

by Kevin Hernandez

psyc2013

problems. - FIT

Wolfe

had a lot of data

there's not such thing as parallel processing - just a difference in efficiency

deicion making problem

no difference in feature and conjunction searches

easier tasks has less decisions to be made

faster when the display is larger because the task becomes easier - makes the target more salient

differences in efficiency

hard tasks

looking for activation map for red and circular

heterogenous distractors

inefficient task

completely overlapping

easy tasks

guided searchs

we have guided searches and activation maps

activation map for distractors could just be thrown away

search results for feature searches did come flatter than the conjunctions

never completely flat for feature searches

did it come out like the text book graph?

put together millions of trails of visual search

Duncan

made the distractors different

less parallel

the search became more difficult and more serial

distractors

in conjunctive search, the distractors as well as the target are all different

are all the same - is the task easy because the distractors are all the same?

automaticity

Variable

may or may not be what you're looking for

given targets, but may not appear in visual search (numbers)

consistent mapping

targets are always targets (letters)

every item you saw a K or H you knew you would be looking for it

knew what they were looking for

Schiffrin

took 2000 trails to increasd speed

LOOK UP OTHER MINDMAP

said that practice takes a long time to master

look for letter in a display

searching through memory? or physical items

1 or 4

memory search

memorise 4 letters

allows for less time in monitoring for tasks - frees up the mind to spend more of consciousness on other tasks

fast, run in parallel, don't draw on any central capacity. unavailable to consciousness and unavoidable, ballistic. Hits target no matter what you do. assumption that automatic processes can be interupted

automatic process

requires learning and a lot of practice

per attentive

happens without any learning

built into visual system

automatic processing

feature searches

search slopes

conjunction tsks

on average takes much longer for greater numbers of displays compared to single feature targets

negative trails

take longer on average as its harder to say no

linear - constant flat

the reaction time is independent of the display size

studied what features we could parallel search

Hue, terminators etc.

treisman

feature map

may have an overall master map of all the features, but our attentional spot light allows us to focus the important features and glue appropriate features and perceive the object

build an object file using features bound together

visual search

illusionary concepts

binding problem

thought to support serial processing

hard to put things together without attention

flashes of images

noticing shapes and colors, but not putting it together coherently

blue car and red toy

red car and blue toy

border search

takes longer as changes across border are more complex

texture segregation

conjunctions

process of left to right - scan

take longer than features

thought to be parallel

pop out

immediate and automatic - no scanning or searching

feature

processing types

parallel

pop out - quick detection

there is no change to response time as we increase distractors

processing multiple step at the same time

store and assemble all steps simultaneously at the end

serial

processing by steps

store and assemble after each step

look at one item at a time and only respond as soon as you see the target

as we increase distractors we have increased response time