No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Scanning movements during haptic search: similarity with fixations during visual search
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 May 2017
Abstract
Finding relevant objects through vision, or visual search, is a crucial function that has received considerable attention in the literature. After decades of research, data suggest that visual fixations are more crucial to understanding how visual search works than are the attributes of stimuli. This idea receives further support from the field of haptic search.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017
References
Anderson, M. L. (2010) Neural reuse: A fundamental organizational principle of the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences
33:245–66.Google Scholar
Ballesteros, S., Millar, S. & Reales, J. M. (1998) Symmetry in haptic and in visual shape perception. Perception and Psychophysics
60:389–404.Google Scholar
Duncan, J. & Humphreys, G. W. (1989) Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review
96:433–58. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.96.3.433.Google Scholar
Grabowecky, M., List, A., Iordanescu, L. & Suzuki, S. (2011) Haptic influence on visual search. i-Perception
2:824.Google Scholar
He, Z. J. & Nakayama, K. (1992) Surfaces versus features in visual search. Nature
359:231–33.Google Scholar
Heller, M. A. (1984) Active and passive touch: The influence of exploration time on form recognition. Journal of General Psychology
110:243–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hickey, C., Chelazzi, L. & Theeuwes, J. (2010) Reward has a larger impact on visual search in people with reward-seeking personalities. Journal of Vision
10:255–55.Google Scholar
Lacey, S., Tal, N., Amedi, A. & Sathian, K. (2009) A putative model of multisensory object representation. Brain Topography
21:269–74.Google Scholar
Lacreuse, A. & Fragaszy, D. M. (1997) Manual exploratory procedures and asymmetries for a haptic search task: A comparison between capuchins (Cebus apella) and humans. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition
2:247–66.Google Scholar
Lederman, S. J. & Klatzky, R. L. (1987) Hand movements: A window into haptic object recognition. Cognitive Psychology
19:342–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newell, F. N., Woods, A. T., Mernagh, M. & Bülthoff, H. H. (2005) Visual, haptic, and crossmodal recognition of scenes. Experimental Brain Research
161:233–42.Google Scholar
Overvliet, K. E., Smeets, J. B. & Brenner, E. (2007) Haptic search with finger movements: Using more fingers does not necessarily reduce search times. Experimental Brain Research
182:427–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overvliet, K. E., Smeets, J. B. & Brenner, E. (2008) The use of proprioception and tactile information in haptic search. Acta Psychologica
129:83–90.Google Scholar
Pascual-Leone, A. & Hamilton, R. (2001) The metamodal organization of the brain. Progress in Brain Research
134:427–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pasqualotto, A., Dumitru, M. L. & Myachykov, A. (2016) Multisensory integration: Brain, body, and world. Frontiers in Psychology
6:2046.Google Scholar
Pasqualotto, A., Finucane, C. M. & Newell, F. N. (2005) Visual and haptic representations of scenes are updated with observer movement. Experimental Brain Research
166:481–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pasqualotto, A., Finucane, C. M. & Newell, F. N. (2013a) Ambient visual information confers a context-specific, long-term benefit on memory for haptic scenes. Cognition
128:363–79.Google Scholar
Pasqualotto, A., Proulx, M. J. & Sereno, M. I. (2013b) Visual experience and the establishment of tactile face-maps in the brain. Perception
39:54.Google Scholar
Pietrini, P., Furey, M. L., Ricciardi, E., Gobbini, M. I., Wu, W. H. C., Cohen, L. G., Guazzelli, M. & Haxby, J. V. (2004) Beyond sensory images: Object-based representation in the human ventral pathway. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
101:5658–63.Google Scholar
Plaisier, M., Kuling, I., Tiest, W. M. B. & Kappers, A. M. (2009) The role of item fixation in haptic search. In: World Haptics 2009 – Third Joint EuroHaptics conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, Salt Lake City, UT, March 2009, pp. 417–21. IEEE. doi: 10.1109/WHC.2009.4810798.Google Scholar
Plaisier, M. A., Tiest, W. M. B. & Kappers, A. M. (2008) Haptic pop-out in a hand sweep. Acta Psychologica
128:368–77.Google Scholar
Proulx, M. J., Parker, M. O., Tahir, Y. & Brennan, C. H. (2014) Parallel mechanisms for visual search in zebrafish. PLoS ONE
9:e111540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sann, C. & Streri, A. (2007) Perception of object shape and texture in human newborns: Evidence from cross-modal transfer tasks. Developmental Science
10:399–410.Google Scholar
Tomonaga, M. (2007) Visual search for orientation of faces by a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes): Face-specific upright superiority and the role of facial configural properties. Primates
48:1–12.Google Scholar
Treisman, A. (1982) Perceptual grouping and attention in visual search for features and for objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
8:194–214.Google Scholar
Uesaki, M. & Ashida, H. (2015) Optic-flow selective cortical sensory regions associated with self-reported states of vection. Frontiers in Psychology
6:775.Google Scholar
Van Polanen, V., Tiest, W. M. B. & Kappers, A. M. (2011) Movement strategies in a haptic search task. In: World Haptics Conference, 2011
IEEE, 275–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, J. M. (1998b) What can 1 million trials tell us about visual search?
Psychological Science
9:33–39. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, J. M., Palmer, E. M. & Horowitz, T. S. (2010b) Reaction time distributions constrain models of visual search. Vision Research
50:1304–11.Google Scholar
Young, A. H. & Hulleman, J. (2013) Eye movements reveal how task difficulty moulds visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
39:168–90.Google Scholar
Zelinsky, G. J. (1996) Using eye saccades to assess the selectivity of search movements. Vision Research
36:2177–21.Google Scholar
Target article
The impending demise of the item in visual search
Related commentaries (30)
An appeal against the item's death sentence: Accounting for diagnostic data patterns with an item-based model of visual search
Analysing real-world visual search tasks helps explain what the functional visual field is, and what its neural mechanisms are
Chances and challenges for an active visual search perspective
Cognitive architecture enables comprehensive predictive models of visual search
Contextual and social cues may dominate natural visual search
Don't admit defeat: A new dawn for the item in visual search
Eye movements are an important part of the story, but not the whole story
Feature integration, attention, and fixations during visual search
Fixations are not all created equal: An objection to mindless visual search
Gaze-contingent manipulation of the FVF demonstrates the importance of fixation duration for explaining search behavior
How functional are functional viewing fields?
Item-based selection is in good shape in visual compound search: A view from electrophysiology
Looking further! The importance of embedding visual search in action
Mathematical fixation: Search viewed through a cognitive lens
Oh, the number of things you will process (in parallel)!
Parallel attentive processing and pre-attentive guidance
Scanning movements during haptic search: similarity with fixations during visual search
Searching for unity: Real-world versus item-based visual search in age-related eye disease
Set size slope still does not distinguish parallel from serial search
Task implementation and top-down control in continuous search
The FVF framework and target prevalence effects
The FVF might be influenced by object-based attention
The “item” as a window into how prior knowledge guides visual search
Those pernicious items
Until the demise of the functional field of view
What fixations reveal about oculomotor scanning behavior in visual search
Where the item still rules supreme: Time-based selection, enumeration, pre-attentive processing and the target template?
Why the item will remain the unit of attentional selection in visual search
“I am not dead yet!” – The Item responds to Hulleman & Olivers
“Target-absent” decisions in cancer nodule detection are more efficient than “target-present” decisions!
Author response
On the brink: The demise of the item in visual search moves closer