The influence of movement-related costs when searching to act and acting to search
Moskowitz, J. B.; Berger, S. A.; Castelhano, M. S.; Gallivan, J. P.; Flanagan, J. R.
Show abstract
Real world search behaviour often involves limb movements, either during search or following search. Here we investigated whether movement-related costs influence search behaviour in two kinds of search tasks. In our visual search tasks, participants made saccades to find a target object among distractors and then moved a cursor, controlled by the handle of a robotic manipulandum, to the target. In our manual search tasks, participants moved the cursor to perform the search, placing it onto objects to reveal their identity as either a target or a distractor. Across experiments, we manipulated either the effort or time costs associated with movement such that these costs varied across the search space. We varied effort by applying different resistive forces to the handle and we varied time costs by altering the speed of the cursor. Our analysis of cursor and eye movements during manual and visual search, respectively, showed that effort influenced manual search but did not influence visual search. In contrast, time costs influenced both visual and manual search. Our results demonstrate that, in addition to perceptual and cognitive factors, movement-related costs can also influence search behaviour. Public Significance StatementMany of the tasks we perform on a daily basis involve searching for targets. Numerous studies have investigated perceptual and cognitive factors that influence decisions about where to search. However, few studies have examined how search is influenced by movement-related costs associated with manual search (e.g., opening drawers to find a corkscrew) or acting on an object once it has been located (e.g., reaching for a particular bottle of wine once it has been spied in a rack). We show that movement effort and time costs associated with manual search, and time costs associated with moving after visual search, can influence decision-making about where to search over time.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Target interception in virtual reality is better for natural versus unnatural trajectory shapes and orientations 98%
- Rapid eye and hand responses in an interception task are differentially modulated by context-dependent predictability 97%
- Instruction Alters The Influence Of Allocentric Landmarks In A Reach Task 97%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.