Cited by 53Visual Attention and Saliency DetectionVisual perception and processing mechanismsHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety

Using cognitive psychology research to inform professional visual search operations

Biggs, Adam T., Kramer, Michelle R., Mitroff, Stephen R.·2018·Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

Abstract

Visual search—locating target(s) among distractors—is a common practice that can range in difficulty from trivially easy to nearly impossible. Professional searches (e.g., airport security, radiology) typically are among the most complicated and challenging tasks, and also often among the most important. The current discussion examines empirical findings in the cognitive psychology literature that contribute to professional search operations, with an emphasis on airport security screening. Primarily, this article focuses on multiple ways to achieve optimal proficiency in security screenings, including personnel selection, training, and continuing assessments. Some of the existing best practices include using orthogonal visual search tasks as predictors of future performance (for selection), item-specific training (for expertise development), and annual competency tests (for continuing assessment). Future research opportunities are discussed, with one especially notable area for future research involving how individuals can potentially develop optimal scanning behaviors for professional search.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jarmac.2018.04.001

Cites

85 of 85 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The prevalence effect is the phenomenon whereby people are more likely to miss and not see things that have a lower prevalence base rate.

    “the prevalence effect (the phenomena whereby people are more likely to miss and not see things that have a lower prevalence base rate, i.e., things that are rare and infrequent, Biggs et al. (2018) and Godwin et al. (2015)”

    From Biased and biasing: the hidden bias cascade and bias snowball effects (2025) · cites this paper as Biggs et al., 2018

  • People who work in the justice and legal systems have past experiences that may cause bias due to the prevalence effect.

    “People who work in the justice and legal systems have past experiences. These may cause a bias due to the prevalence effect”

    From Biased and biasing: the hidden bias cascade and bias snowball effects (2025) · cites this paper as Biggs et al., 2018

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 87 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Biggs, A. T., Kramer, M. R., & Mitroff, S. R.
Affiliations
  • Naval Medical Research Unit DAYTON (US)
  • George Washington University (US)
Venue
Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition
Published
2018-06
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
189-198
ISSN
  • 2211-3681 (ISSN-L)
  • 2211-369X
OpenAlex
W2807876580
Cited by
53
References
87
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 3
FWCI
3.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Army Research Office
  • Department of Homeland Security
  • Transportation Security Administration
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Keywords
visual search, airport security screening, personnel selection, job performance prediction, expertise development, competency testing, scanning behavior, human factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review