决策中的视觉环境与注意。

IF 17.3 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Psychological bulletin Pub Date : 2021-06-01 DOI:10.1037/bul0000328
Jacob L Orquin, Erik S Lahm, Hrvoje Stojić
{"title":"决策中的视觉环境与注意。","authors":"Jacob L Orquin,&nbsp;Erik S Lahm,&nbsp;Hrvoje Stojić","doi":"10.1037/bul0000328","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Visual attention is a fundamental aspect of most everyday decisions, and governments and companies spend vast resources competing for the attention of decision makers. In natural environments, choice options differ on a variety of visual factors, such as salience, position, or surface size. However, most decision theories ignore such visual factors, focusing on cognitive factors such as preferences as determinants of attention. To provide a systematic review of how the visual environment guides attention we meta-analyze 122 effect sizes on eye movements in decision making. A psychometric meta-analysis and Top10 sensitivity analysis show that visual factors play a similar or larger role than cognitive factors in determining attention. The visual factors that most influence attention are positioning information centrally, ρ = .43 (Top10 = .67), increasing the surface size, ρ = .35 (Top10 = .43), reducing the set size of competing information elements, ρ = .24 (Top10 = .24), and increasing visual salience, ρ = .13 (Top10 = .24). Cognitive factors include attending more to preferred choice options and attributes, ρ = .36 (Top10 = .31), effects of task instructions on attention, ρ = .35 (Top10 = .21), and attending more to the ultimately chosen option, ρ = .59 (Top10 = .26). Understanding real-world decision making will require the integration of both visual and cognitive factors in future theories of attention and decision making. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":"147 6","pages":"597-617"},"PeriodicalIF":17.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The visual environment and attention in decision making.\",\"authors\":\"Jacob L Orquin,&nbsp;Erik S Lahm,&nbsp;Hrvoje Stojić\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/bul0000328\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Visual attention is a fundamental aspect of most everyday decisions, and governments and companies spend vast resources competing for the attention of decision makers. In natural environments, choice options differ on a variety of visual factors, such as salience, position, or surface size. However, most decision theories ignore such visual factors, focusing on cognitive factors such as preferences as determinants of attention. To provide a systematic review of how the visual environment guides attention we meta-analyze 122 effect sizes on eye movements in decision making. A psychometric meta-analysis and Top10 sensitivity analysis show that visual factors play a similar or larger role than cognitive factors in determining attention. The visual factors that most influence attention are positioning information centrally, ρ = .43 (Top10 = .67), increasing the surface size, ρ = .35 (Top10 = .43), reducing the set size of competing information elements, ρ = .24 (Top10 = .24), and increasing visual salience, ρ = .13 (Top10 = .24). Cognitive factors include attending more to preferred choice options and attributes, ρ = .36 (Top10 = .31), effects of task instructions on attention, ρ = .35 (Top10 = .21), and attending more to the ultimately chosen option, ρ = .59 (Top10 = .26). Understanding real-world decision making will require the integration of both visual and cognitive factors in future theories of attention and decision making. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20854,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological bulletin\",\"volume\":\"147 6\",\"pages\":\"597-617\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":17.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological bulletin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000328\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000328","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

视觉注意力是大多数日常决策的一个基本方面,政府和公司花费大量资源来争夺决策者的注意力。在自然环境中,选择选项因各种视觉因素而异,例如显著性、位置或表面尺寸。然而,大多数决策理论忽略了这些视觉因素,而把重点放在认知因素上,如偏好作为注意力的决定因素。为了提供关于视觉环境如何引导注意力的系统综述,我们对决策过程中眼动的122个效应量进行了meta分析。心理测量元分析和Top10敏感性分析表明,视觉因素在决定注意力方面的作用与认知因素相似或更大。对注意力影响最大的视觉因素是集中定位信息,ρ = 0.43 (Top10 = 0.67),增大表面尺寸,ρ = 0.35 (Top10 = 0.43),减小竞争信息元素集合大小,ρ = 0.24 (Top10 = 0.24),增大视觉显著性,ρ = 0.13 (Top10 = 0.24)。认知因素包括更多关注首选选项和属性,ρ = 0.36 (Top10 = 0.31),任务指示对注意力的影响,ρ = 0.35 (Top10 = 0.21),以及更多关注最终选择的选项,ρ = 0.59 (Top10 = 0.26)。理解现实世界的决策将需要在未来的注意力和决策理论中整合视觉和认知因素。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The visual environment and attention in decision making.

Visual attention is a fundamental aspect of most everyday decisions, and governments and companies spend vast resources competing for the attention of decision makers. In natural environments, choice options differ on a variety of visual factors, such as salience, position, or surface size. However, most decision theories ignore such visual factors, focusing on cognitive factors such as preferences as determinants of attention. To provide a systematic review of how the visual environment guides attention we meta-analyze 122 effect sizes on eye movements in decision making. A psychometric meta-analysis and Top10 sensitivity analysis show that visual factors play a similar or larger role than cognitive factors in determining attention. The visual factors that most influence attention are positioning information centrally, ρ = .43 (Top10 = .67), increasing the surface size, ρ = .35 (Top10 = .43), reducing the set size of competing information elements, ρ = .24 (Top10 = .24), and increasing visual salience, ρ = .13 (Top10 = .24). Cognitive factors include attending more to preferred choice options and attributes, ρ = .36 (Top10 = .31), effects of task instructions on attention, ρ = .35 (Top10 = .21), and attending more to the ultimately chosen option, ρ = .59 (Top10 = .26). Understanding real-world decision making will require the integration of both visual and cognitive factors in future theories of attention and decision making. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological bulletin
Psychological bulletin 医学-心理学
CiteScore
33.60
自引率
0.90%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Psychological Bulletin publishes syntheses of research in scientific psychology. Research syntheses seek to summarize past research by drawing overall conclusions from many separate investigations that address related or identical hypotheses. A research synthesis typically presents the authors' assessments: -of the state of knowledge concerning the relations of interest; -of critical assessments of the strengths and weaknesses in past research; -of important issues that research has left unresolved, thereby directing future research so it can yield a maximum amount of new information.
期刊最新文献
Reporting bias, not external focus: A robust Bayesian meta-analysis and systematic review of the external focus of attention literature. Supporting the status quo is weakly associated with subjective well-being: A comparison of the palliative function of ideology across social status groups using a meta-analytic approach. When connecting with LGBTQ+ communities helps and why it does: A meta-analysis of the relationship between connectedness and health-related outcomes. Who am I? A second-order meta-analytic review of correlates of the self in childhood and adolescence. Defining social reward: A systematic review of human and animal studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1