Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-hzqq2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-28T15:57:40.992Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“Target-absent” decisions in cancer nodule detection are more efficient than “target-present” decisions!

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 May 2017

Trevor J. Crawford ,
Damien Litchfield  and
Tim Donovan
Trevor J. Crawford
Affiliation:
Dementia Research and Eye Tracking Lab, Faculty of Science and Technology, Psychology Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YF, United Kingdom; t.crawford@lancaster.ac.uk http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/trevor-crawford(55e99f0c-4f92-437e-9a68-60d7f94265f2).html
Damien Litchfield
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk L39 4QP, United Kingdom; litchfd@edgehill.ac.uk https://www.edgehill.ac.uk/psychology/dr-damien-litchfield/
Tim Donovan
Affiliation:
Medical & Sport Sciences, University of Cumbria, Lancaster LA1 3JD, United Kingdom. tim.donovan@cumbria.ac.uk https://www.cumbria.ac.uk/study/academic-staff/all-staff-members/tim-donovan-phd.php
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Many parts of the medical image are never fixated when a radiologist searches for cancer nodules. Experts are able to use peripheral vision very efficiently. The size of the functional visual field appears to increase according to the level of expertise. However, searching a medical image diverges, in a puzzling way, from the typical search for a target feature in the laboratory.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 40 , 2017 , e136
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Charness, N., Reingold, E. M., Pomplun, M. & Stampe, D. M. (2001) The perceptual aspect of skilled performance in chess: Evidence from eye movements. Memory and Cognition 29:1146–52. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03206384.Google Scholar
Donovan, T., Manning, D. J., Phillips, P. W., Higham, S. & Crawford, T. (2005) The effect of feedback on performance in a fracture detection task. SPIE 5749:79–85. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.593294.Google Scholar
Kundel, H. L., Nodine, C. F. & Toto, L. C. (1984) Eye movements and the detection of lung tumors in chest images. In: Theoretical and applied aspects of eye movement research, ed. Gale, A. G. & Johnson, F., pp. 297–304. Elsevier. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)61846-4.Google Scholar
Litchfield, D. & Donovan, T. (2016) Worth a quick look? Initial scene previews can guide eye movements as a function of domain-specific expertise but can also have unforeseen costs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 42(7):982–94. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000202.Google Scholar
Manning, D., Barker-Mill, S. C., Donovan, T. & Crawford, T. (2005) Time-dependent observer errors in pulmonary nodule Detection. The British Journal of Radiology 78:1–5. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr/13453920.Google Scholar
Manning, D., Ethell, S., Donovan, T. & Crawford, T. (2006) How do radiologists do it? The influence of experience and training on searching for chest nodules. Radiography 12:134–42. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2005.02.003.Google Scholar
Rayner, K. (2009) Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 62:1457–506. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470210902816461.Google Scholar
Reingold, E. M., Sheridan, H. (2011) Eye movements and visual expertise in chess and medicine. In: Oxford handbook on eye movements, ed. Gilchrist, I. D. & Everling, S., pp. 528–50. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar