Visual Search Strategies for Healthy Subjects

Overseen By Jeremy M Wolfe, PHD

Age: 18+

Sex: Any

Trial Phase: Academic

Sponsor: Brigham and Women's Hospital

Disqualifiers: Vision less than 20/25, neuromuscular, visual disorders

No Placebo Group All trial participants will receive the active study treatment (no placebo)

Compensation: Varies

Number of Visits: Unknown

50 Participants Needed

What You Need to Know Before You Apply

What is the purpose of this trial?

This trial aims to understand how people approach visual search tasks when given choices. Participants will engage in different versions of search tasks where the target remains the same, but the distractions vary. The trial will compare performance changes between tasks done in a set order and those where participants choose the order, referred to as "Choice" and "Mixed trials." Suitable individuals must have good color vision and corrected vision of at least 20/25, with no history of neuromuscular or visual disorders. As an unphased trial, this study offers participants the opportunity to contribute to foundational research in cognitive science.

Do I need to stop taking my current medications to join the trial?

The trial information does not specify whether you need to stop taking your current medications.

What prior data suggests that these visual search strategies are safe for participants?

Research has shown that visual search tasks are generally safe for participants. These studies examine how well people focus and notice details during these tasks. No negative effects have been reported from participating in these activities. The tasks involve finding specific items among distracting ones, similar to searching for something in a messy room. Evidence indicates that these tasks do not cause harm or discomfort. Participants can expect a safe experience akin to other cognitive exercises. ^{1 2 3 4 5}

Why are researchers excited about this trial?

Researchers are excited about these visual search strategy trials because they aim to uncover how different decision-making processes affect task performance. Unlike standard approaches, these trials allow participants to choose tasks in various ways, from having full choice to none at all, or even random assignment. This design could reveal insights into how choice impacts cognitive performance and decision-making efficiency. By understanding these dynamics, researchers hope to improve methods for enhancing cognitive tasks and learning strategies in both healthy individuals and potentially those with cognitive impairments.

What evidence suggests that this trial's treatments could be effective for visual search strategies?

Research shows that different methods of performing visual search tasks lead to varying results. In this trial, participants will experience various conditions to assess these effects. Studies indicate that when individuals choose their tasks, as in the Trial Choice condition, their focus and decision-making improve. Choosing tasks that align with their preferences enhances performance. Conversely, when tasks follow a set order, as in the Blocked condition, the brain learns to manage distractions, enhancing overall search skills. Evidence from these studies suggests that both choosing tasks and following a set order effectively boost visual search abilities, with each method offering distinct benefits. ^{3 6 7 8 9}

Who Is on the Research Team?

Jeremy M Wolfe, PhD

Principal Investigator

Brigham and Women's Hospital

Are You a Good Fit for This Trial?

This trial is suitable for individuals with normal color vision and at least 20/25 corrected visual acuity. It's not open to those with a history of neuromuscular or visual disorders, or attention deficit disorder.

Inclusion Criteria

Pass Ishihara color vision test

Exclusion Criteria

Vision less than 20/25 with correction

History of neuromuscular or visual disorders

Timeline for a Trial Participant

Screening

Participants are screened for eligibility to participate in the trial

2-4 weeks

Experimentation

Participants engage in visual search tasks under different conditions: Trial Choice, Block Choice, Random, Blocked, and Yoked.

Varies by condition

Multiple sessions

Follow-up

Participants are monitored for response time and accuracy after completing the tasks

4 weeks

What Are the Treatments Tested in This Trial?

Interventions

• Choice
• Mixed trials

Trial Overview

The study examines differences in visual search behavior by comparing repeated searches (blocked trials) against varied searches (mixed trials). Participants have some choice in their search tasks, which involve identifying a consistent target among changing distractors.

How Is the Trial Designed?

Group I: Yoked condition Experimental Treatment 2 Interventions

Participants in this condition see trials in the order chosen by a participant in the Trial Choice condition. Again, to keep the motor demands similar to the choice conditions, at the beginning of each trial, participants need to click the highlighted task button for the assigned task type though they have no choice in the matter.

Group II: Trial Choice condition Experimental Treatment 2 Interventions

In this condition, participants are allowed to choose which task to perform on each trial. At the beginning of each trial, the message "Choose your task" appears in the center of the screen. Participants choose one of four tasks by clicking on the corresponding button on the left side of the patch. The button is deactivated when the number of trials completed in a task reached 50. If a deactivated button is clicked, the message "Choose another task" appears at the center again.

Group III: Random condition Experimental Treatment 2 Interventions

In this condition, participants do not choose which task to perform on each trial. The order of the trials is randomized and assigned to the participant before each trial. Before each trial, the target task is highlighted and activated, while the other buttons remain deactivated. The trial begins only when the participant clicks on the correct task button.

Group IV: Blocked condition Experimental Treatment 2 Interventions

In this condition, participants also have no choice. Here, trials of each task type are presented in a blocked fashion. After 50 trials of one type, the task is changed to another task. To keep the motor demands similar to the choice conditions, at the beginning of each trial, participants need to click the highlighted button for the assigned task type. The order of blocks is counterbalanced across participants.

Group V: Block Choice condition Experimental Treatment 2 Interventions

In this condition, participants begin by choosing one of the four tasks. Participants do not need to choose a task before each trial; the current trial is drawn automatically from the most recently chosen task until the participant actively chooses to switch tasks or until the full complement of trials for that task is exhausted. At the start of each trial, a "switch" button appears at the center of the display for 700 msec. If participants click on that button within the 700 msec, they are prompted to select the task. If participants does not click the switch button within the 700 msec window, the button vanished and a trial from the current task will be presented. When the number of trials of one task reaches its limit, participants are asked to select another task.

Who Is Running the Clinical Trial?

Brigham and Women's Hospital

Lead Sponsor

Trials

1,694

Recruited

14,790,000+

National Eye Institute (NEI)

Collaborator

Trials

572

Recruited

1,320,000+

Published Research Related to This Trial

Explicitly reporting the incremental risk of adverse reactions, rather than just total rates, significantly reduces worry about complications among patients, as shown in two survey experiments with over 3,400 participants.

This method of presenting risks helps patients better understand the baseline risk and the additional risk posed by medications, potentially leading to improved decision-making regarding treatment options.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Alternate methods of framing information about medication side effects: incremental risk versus total risk of occurrence. Zikmund-Fisher, BJ., Fagerlin, A., Roberts, TR., et al.[2013]

A consensus study involving 24 experts led to the recommendation of 10 effective visualizations for presenting harm outcomes in clinical trial publications, enhancing clarity and understanding of trial results.

These visualizations, tailored to different types of outcomes, provide a more informative alternative to traditional frequency tables, helping researchers and clinicians better interpret harm data in clinical trials.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Visualising harms in publications of randomised controlled trials: consensus and recommendations. Phillips, R., Cro, S., Wheeler, G., et al.[2023]

Visualizing adverse events in clinical trials using methods like dot plots and volcano plots can enhance communication about the severity, timing, and recurrence of harms, rather than just counting occurrences.

The study analyzed individual participant data from a randomized trial of gabapentin for neuropathic pain, demonstrating that effective visualizations can help stakeholders better understand the multidimensional nature of harms in clinical research.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Comparing the Value of Data Visualization Methods for Communicating Harms in Clinical Trials. Qureshi, R., Chen, X., Goerg, C., et al.[2022]

The study analyzed adverse event (AE) data from six randomized controlled trials involving schizophrenia treatments, highlighting that the absolute prevalence and expected duration of AEs provide a more comprehensive understanding of a drug's safety compared to just incidence rates.

Using a new metric to assess the drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence, the research found that some AEs not listed in the standard drug label significantly impacted drug tolerability, suggesting that including these metrics in drug labels could enhance safety signal detection and inform better treatment choices.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A Novel Method for Deriving Adverse Event Prevalence in Randomized Controlled Trials: Potential for Improved Understanding of Benefit-Risk Ratio and Application to Drug Labels. Piacentino, D., Ogirala, A., Lew, R., et al.[2023]

Citations

1.

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11411006/

Investigating an effort avoidance account of attentional ...

Our results showed that the effort avoidance for specific subcomponents of a visual search task can be probed and linked to overall strategy choices.

2.

sciencedirect.com

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010945224001734

Individual differences in visual search: A systematic review ...

One aim of this research is to systematically investigate the existing evidence on associations between VS performance and a targeted selection of self-reported ...

3.

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11093844/

Joint contributions of preview and task instructions on visual ...

We used the Adaptive Choice Visual Search (ACVS), a task designed to assess attentional control optimality. We used explicit strategy instructions to manipulate ...

4.

journalofcognition.org

journalofcognition.org/articles/10.5334/joc.182

Classic Visual Search Effects in an Additional Singleton Task

Visual search refers to our ability to find what we are looking for among many competing visual inputs. Here, we report the availability of ...

5.

tandfonline.com

tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09638180.2025.2504438?af=R

Reward Choices: Experimental Evidence on Cognitive ...

Abstract. This study examines the effect of a tangible reward choice in task settings that require varying levels of cognitive effort from participants.

6.

labvanced.com

labvanced.com/content/research/en/blog/2025-02-visual-search-task/

Visual Search Task- A Comprehensive Guide for ...

Visual Search Tasks aim to study different cognitive functions, primarily attention and perception. Common Types of Visual Search Tasks in Psychology Research.

7.

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7804579/

Assessing visual search performance using a novel ...

These results demonstrate how visual search performance can be investigated using VR-based naturalistic dynamic scenes and with high behavioral relevance.

8.

sciencedirect.com

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2215016121000285

Cognitive task analysis and workload classification

Cognitive task analysis is a process for modeling the cognitive actions required of a human during a task.

9.

cognitiveresearchjournal.springeropen.com

cognitiveresearchjournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s41235-021-00283-4

Visual search under physical effort is faster but more ...

We found that visual search under physical effort is faster, but more vulnerable to distractor interference, potentially due to arousal and reduced inhibitory ...