4.3 Article

What pops out for you pops out for fish: Four common visual features

期刊

JOURNAL OF VISION
卷 19, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1167/19.1.1

关键词

visual search; reaction times; response times; serial search; parallel search; pop-out; conjunction search; visual attention; selective attention; vision; archerfish

资金

  1. Israel Science Foundation [211/15]
  2. Binational Science Foundation (BSF) [2011058]
  3. Frankel Fund at the Computer Science Department
  4. Helmsley Charitable Trust through the Agricultural, Biological and Cognitive Robotics Initiative of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Visual search is the ability to detect a target of interest against a background of distracting objects. For many animals, performing this task fast and accurately is crucial for survival. Typically, visual-search performance is measured by the time it takes the observer to detect a target against a backdrop of distractors. The efficiency of a visual search depends fundamentally on the features of the target, the distractors, and the interaction between them. Substantial efforts have been devoted to investigating the influence of different visual features on visual-search performance in humans. In particular, it has been demonstrated that color, size, orientation, and motion are efficient visual features to guide attention in humans. However, little is known about which features are efficient and which are not in other vertebrates. Given earlier observations that moving targets elicit pop-out and parallel search in the archerfish during visual-search tasks, here we investigate and confirm that all four of these visual features also facilitate efficient search in the archerfish in a manner comparable to humans. In conjunction with results reported for other species, these finding suggest universality in the way visual search is carried out by animals despite very different brain anatomies and living environments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据