<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>target verification process &#8211; Science</title>
	<atom:link href="https://scienmag.com/tag/target-verification-process/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://scienmag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2026 21:34:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.3</generator>

 
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">73899611</site>	<item>
		<title>Environmental volatility is associated with adaptive caution in visual search</title>
		<link>https://scienmag.com/environmental-volatility-is-associated-with-adaptive-caution-in-visual-search/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Drew Townsend]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2026 21:34:45 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Biology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology and Engineering]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adaptive decision-making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[associated]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[caution in visual attention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cognitive strategies under volatility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decision-making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[distractor influence in visual search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drift-diffusion model]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[environmental]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[environmental volatility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[environmental volatility effects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[error rates in visual search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eye movement behavior]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eye tracking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eye-tracking in search tasks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[impact of environmental unpredictability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kalman filtering]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oculomotor capture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[response caution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[response time variability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[target verification process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[visual search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[visual uncertainty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[volatility]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://scienmag.com/?p=330727</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[A controlled visual-search study found that environmental volatility was associated with slower, more cautious responses and fewer errors, rather than a clear change in initial eye capture of distractors.]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a controlled visual-search experiment, greater environmental volatility was associated with slower, more cautious responses and fewer errors, but not with a detectable change in initial eye capture when the position within a sequence of distractors was held constant. The results suggest that observers adjusted how cautiously they committed to a decision as surrounding conditions became less predictable. Researchers investigated whether volatility affects the initial overt movement of the eyes, subsequent target verification or the commitment to respond.</p>
<p>Participants performed an additional-singleton visual-search task while their eye movements were recorded. Distractor presence followed either high- or low-volatility sequences, and the overall prevalence of distractors remained constant across the two regimes. That difference disappeared when comparisons were matched by position in the run.</p>
<p>The pooled effect was therefore consistent with a structural consequence of the manipulation: high-volatility blocks contained more early-run positions, where capture is intrinsically more frequent. On distractor-absent trials, which isolated the effect of volatility without a competing item, capture showed no detectable difference between regimes. Behavioral differences emerged later in the decision process.</p>
<p>Under high volatility, participants produced longer response times, made more fixations, spent more time dwelling on the final target and committed fewer errors. Target-acquisition latency—the time needed to reach the target—remained unchanged. Together, these observations locate the volatility effect after the first saccade, when observers were deciding whether the available visual evidence justified a response.</p>
<p>The authors evaluated the data with a hierarchical drift-diffusion model and a complementary volatility Kalman-filter model. Both analyses indicated that manual responses contained boundary-related and drift-related structure, linking environmental volatility to the accumulation of evidence and the thresholds used for decision-making. With distractor frequency held constant, the findings support increased response caution rather than a direct change in early oculomotor capture.</p>
<p>The authors describe this pattern as consistent with precision-weighted adjustment to environmental uncertainty. Because the evidence comes from a controlled laboratory task with eye tracking, the study establishes an association within that search paradigm rather than demonstrating how volatility influences decisions in everyday settings.</p>
<p><strong>Subject of Research:</strong> How environmental volatility affects oculomotor capture and cautious decisions in visual search</p>
<p><strong>Article Title:</strong> Environmental volatility is associated with adaptive caution in visual search</p>
<p><strong>Article References:</strong> Qiu, N., Allenmark, F., Chen, S., Müller, H. J., &amp; Shi, Z. (2026). Environmental volatility is associated with adaptive caution in visual search. <em>PLOS Computational Biology, 22</em>(10), e1014310. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1014310" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1014310</a></p>
<p><strong>Image Credits:</strong> AI Generated</p>
<p><strong>DOI:</strong> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1014310" rel="noopener noreferrer">10.1371/journal.pcbi.1014310</a></p>
<p><strong>Keywords:</strong> visual search, environmental volatility, eye tracking, response caution, decision-making, drift-diffusion model, Kalman filtering, oculomotor capture, visual uncertainty, Environmental, volatility, associated</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">330727</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
