The effects of increasing target prevalence on information processing during visual search
Abstract
The proportion of trials on which a target is presented (referred to as the target prevalence) during visual search influences the probability that the target will be detected. As prevalence increases, participants become biased toward reporting that the target is present. This bias results in an increase in detection rates for the target, coupled with an increased likelihood of making a false alarm. Previous work has demonstrated that, as prevalence increases, participants spend an increasing period of time searching on target-absent trials. The goal of the present study was to determine the information processing during the additional time spent searching on target-absent trials as prevalence increased. We recorded participants' eye movement behavior as they were engaged in low-prevalence (25% target-present trials), medium-prevalence (50%), or high-prevalence (75%) search. Increased prevalence primarily influenced search by increasing the time spent examining objects in the display, rather than by increasing the proportion of objects examined in each display. In addition, the additional time spent examining objects in high-prevalence target-absent trials was the result of revisiting objects. We discuss the implications of these results in relation to current models of search as well as ongoing efforts to alleviate the prevalence effect.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 Godwin et al., 2015
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 Godwin et al., 2015
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Biased and biasing: the hidden bias cascade and bias snowball effects
Dror, I. E. (2025) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs15040490 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Growns, B., & Kukucka, J. (2021) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.3800 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
- Authors
- Godwin, H. J., Menneer, T., Cave, K. R., Thaibsyah, M., & Donnelly, N.
- Affiliations
- University of Southampton (GB)
- University of Massachusetts Amherst (US)
- Corresponding author
- Godwin, Hayward J.
- Venue
- Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
- Published
- 2014-07-15
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 469-475
- ISSN
- 1069-9384 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-5320
- OpenAlex
- W2062754961
- Cited by
- 44
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 4.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Psychonomic Bulletin & Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Economic and Social Research Council (ES/I032398/1)
- 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
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- target prevalence, visual search, eye movements, search time, false alarms, target detection, search model, target-absent trials
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Attention, Discrimination, Psychological, Eye Movements, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Processes, Motion Perception, Orientation, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Probability, Reaction Time, Prevalence, Young Adult
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