Abstract
By monitoring subjects' eye movements during a visual search task, we examined the possibility that the mechanism responsible for guiding attention during visual search has no memory for which locations have already been examined. Subjects did reexamine some items during their search, but the pattern of revisitations did notfit the predictions of the memory less search model. In addition, a large proportion of the refixations were directed at the target, suggesting that the revisitations were due to subjects' remembering which items had not been adequately identified. We also examined the patterns of fixations and compared them with the predictions of a memoryless search model Subjects' fixation patterns showed an increasing hazard function, whereas the memoryless model predicts a flat function. Lastly, we found no evidence suggesting that fixations were guided by amnesic covert scans that scouted the environment for new items during fixations. Results do not support the claims of the memorvless search model, and instead suggest that visual search does have memory.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
