Kunar M, Montana G, Watson D
Psychon Bull Rev. 2024; .
PMID: 39448515
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-024-02601-5.
Patterson F, Kunar M
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2024; 9(1):59.
PMID: 39218972
PMC: 11366737.
DOI: 10.1186/s41235-024-00576-4.
Moher J, Delos Reyes A, Drew T
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2024; 9(1):54.
PMID: 39183257
PMC: 11345343.
DOI: 10.1186/s41235-024-00587-1.
Li A, Hulleman J, Wolfe J
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2024; 9(1):15.
PMID: 38502280
PMC: 10951178.
DOI: 10.1186/s41235-024-00543-z.
Song J, Wolfe B
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2024; 9(1):6.
PMID: 38302804
PMC: 10834906.
DOI: 10.1186/s41235-024-00531-3.
High target prevalence may reduce the spread of attention during search tasks.
Guevara Pinto J, Papesh M
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2023; 86(1):62-83.
PMID: 38036870
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-023-02821-2.
Graded prioritisation of targets in search: reward diminishes the low prevalence effect.
Hadjipanayi V, Ludwig C, Kent C
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2023; 8(1):52.
PMID: 37542145
PMC: 10403486.
DOI: 10.1186/s41235-023-00507-9.
Framing the fallibility of Computer-Aided Detection aids cancer detection.
Kunar M, Watson D
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2023; 8(1):30.
PMID: 37222932
PMC: 10209366.
DOI: 10.1186/s41235-023-00485-y.
The influence of category representativeness on the low prevalence effect in visual search.
ODonnell R, Wyble B
Psychon Bull Rev. 2022; 30(2):634-642.
PMID: 36138284
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-022-02183-0.
Taking prevalence effects on the road: Rare hazards are often missed.
Kosovicheva A, Wolfe J, Wolfe B
Psychon Bull Rev. 2022; 30(1):212-223.
PMID: 35953668
PMC: 9918605.
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-022-02159-0.
The low prevalence effect in fingerprint comparison amongst forensic science trainees and novices.
Growns B, Dunn J, Helm R, Towler A, Kukucka J
PLoS One. 2022; 17(8):e0272338.
PMID: 35951612
PMC: 9371274.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0272338.
Target-rate effect in continuous visual search.
Chan L, Chan W
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2022; 7(1):36.
PMID: 35524887
PMC: 9077982.
DOI: 10.1186/s41235-022-00392-8.
The presence of a distractor matching the content of working memory induces delayed quitting in visual search.
Wu Y, Pan Y
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2022; 84(3):760-770.
PMID: 35359229
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-022-02477-4.
The optimal use of computer aided detection to find low prevalence cancers.
Kunar M
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2022; 7(1):13.
PMID: 35122173
PMC: 8816998.
DOI: 10.1186/s41235-022-00361-1.
Feedback moderates the effect of prevalence on perceptual decisions.
Lyu W, Levari D, Nartker M, Little D, Wolfe J
Psychon Bull Rev. 2021; 28(6):1906-1914.
PMID: 34173185
PMC: 8932255.
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-021-01956-3.
Improved X-ray baggage screening sensitivity with 'targetless' search training.
Muhl-Richardson A, Parker M, Recio S, Tortosa-Molina M, Daffron J, Davis G
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2021; 6(1):33.
PMID: 33855667
PMC: 8046861.
DOI: 10.1186/s41235-021-00295-0.
When experience does not promote expertise: security professionals fail to detect low prevalence fake IDs.
Weatherford D, Roberson D, Erickson W
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2021; 6(1):25.
PMID: 33792842
PMC: 8017042.
DOI: 10.1186/s41235-021-00288-z.
The confirmation and prevalence biases in visual search reflect separate underlying processes.
Walenchok S, Goldinger S, Hout M
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2020; 46(3):274-291.
PMID: 32077742
PMC: 7185152.
DOI: 10.1037/xhp0000714.
You shall not pass: how facial variability and feedback affect the detection of low-prevalence fake IDs.
Weatherford D, Erickson W, Thomas J, Walker M, Schein B
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2020; 5(1):3.
PMID: 31993804
PMC: 6987271.
DOI: 10.1186/s41235-019-0204-1.
Using Eye Movements to Understand how Security Screeners Search for Threats in X-Ray Baggage.
Donnelly N, Muhl-Richardson A, Godwin H, Cave K
Vision (Basel). 2019; 3(2).
PMID: 31735825
PMC: 6802782.
DOI: 10.3390/vision3020024.