Prof Cheryl Metcalf
@cherylmetcalf.bsky.social
Professor of Health Innovation & Technology at the University of Southampton, UK. Head of School- Healthcare Enterprise & Innovation. Exec Dir. MSc Medical Technology, Innovation & Design. Inventor, innovator, leader and mam of boys.
Looking forward to today - always an interesting day @sehta.bsky.social
October 3, 2025 at 8:39 AM
Looking forward to today - always an interesting day @sehta.bsky.social
Reposted by Prof Cheryl Metcalf
Authors on blue sky: @hadendewis.bsky.social, @haywardgodwin.bsky.social, @cherylmetcalf.bsky.social
August 5, 2025 at 2:29 PM
Authors on blue sky: @hadendewis.bsky.social, @haywardgodwin.bsky.social, @cherylmetcalf.bsky.social
Reposted by Prof Cheryl Metcalf
🧵 6/6
Bottom line: Interactive search is strongly biased by effort.
When searching, we begin by focusing on areas that require the least effort. Even when doing so comes at a cost.
📄 Full paper: doi.org/10.3758/s134...
Bottom line: Interactive search is strongly biased by effort.
When searching, we begin by focusing on areas that require the least effort. Even when doing so comes at a cost.
📄 Full paper: doi.org/10.3758/s134...
Easy does it: Selection during interactive search tasks is biased towards objects that can be examined easily - Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
It is well understood that attentional selection is required to deploy visual attention to relevant objects within displays during visual search tasks. Interactive search, an extension of visual searc...
doi.org
August 5, 2025 at 2:29 PM
🧵 6/6
Bottom line: Interactive search is strongly biased by effort.
When searching, we begin by focusing on areas that require the least effort. Even when doing so comes at a cost.
📄 Full paper: doi.org/10.3758/s134...
Bottom line: Interactive search is strongly biased by effort.
When searching, we begin by focusing on areas that require the least effort. Even when doing so comes at a cost.
📄 Full paper: doi.org/10.3758/s134...
Reposted by Prof Cheryl Metcalf
🧵5/6
To our surprise, in Experiment 2, participants consistently prioritised interactions with information-poor cubes first.
🔍 Why? We believe that whilst less optimal, it was cognitively easier to process information-poor cubes first.
In other words, effort wins again.
To our surprise, in Experiment 2, participants consistently prioritised interactions with information-poor cubes first.
🔍 Why? We believe that whilst less optimal, it was cognitively easier to process information-poor cubes first.
In other words, effort wins again.
August 5, 2025 at 2:29 PM
🧵5/6
To our surprise, in Experiment 2, participants consistently prioritised interactions with information-poor cubes first.
🔍 Why? We believe that whilst less optimal, it was cognitively easier to process information-poor cubes first.
In other words, effort wins again.
To our surprise, in Experiment 2, participants consistently prioritised interactions with information-poor cubes first.
🔍 Why? We believe that whilst less optimal, it was cognitively easier to process information-poor cubes first.
In other words, effort wins again.
Reposted by Prof Cheryl Metcalf
🧵 4/6
In Experiment 2 we focused on visual information. Cubes either contained multiple shapes (information-rich) or were predominately empty (information-poor).
Our logic? Focusing on areas with a large number of potential targets would be the more optimal strategy.
In Experiment 2 we focused on visual information. Cubes either contained multiple shapes (information-rich) or were predominately empty (information-poor).
Our logic? Focusing on areas with a large number of potential targets would be the more optimal strategy.
August 5, 2025 at 2:29 PM
🧵 4/6
In Experiment 2 we focused on visual information. Cubes either contained multiple shapes (information-rich) or were predominately empty (information-poor).
Our logic? Focusing on areas with a large number of potential targets would be the more optimal strategy.
In Experiment 2 we focused on visual information. Cubes either contained multiple shapes (information-rich) or were predominately empty (information-poor).
Our logic? Focusing on areas with a large number of potential targets would be the more optimal strategy.
Reposted by Prof Cheryl Metcalf
🧵 3/6
In Experiment 1, half of the cubes were made to be hard to rotate, and half were easy.
Our results showed that participants developed an extremely strong and consistent bias towards selecting easy cubes first.
😴 We’re wired to avoid physical effort – even in simple mouse movements.
In Experiment 1, half of the cubes were made to be hard to rotate, and half were easy.
Our results showed that participants developed an extremely strong and consistent bias towards selecting easy cubes first.
😴 We’re wired to avoid physical effort – even in simple mouse movements.
August 5, 2025 at 2:29 PM
🧵 3/6
In Experiment 1, half of the cubes were made to be hard to rotate, and half were easy.
Our results showed that participants developed an extremely strong and consistent bias towards selecting easy cubes first.
😴 We’re wired to avoid physical effort – even in simple mouse movements.
In Experiment 1, half of the cubes were made to be hard to rotate, and half were easy.
Our results showed that participants developed an extremely strong and consistent bias towards selecting easy cubes first.
😴 We’re wired to avoid physical effort – even in simple mouse movements.
Reposted by Prof Cheryl Metcalf
🧵 2/6
Methods: We ran two experiments where participants rotated virtual cubes whilst trying to find a target T-shape amongst distractor L shapes.
💻 We utilised @threejs.org and @jspsych.org to make this possible. You can demo this yourself via this link! – tinyurl.com/4tz6aufs
Methods: We ran two experiments where participants rotated virtual cubes whilst trying to find a target T-shape amongst distractor L shapes.
💻 We utilised @threejs.org and @jspsych.org to make this possible. You can demo this yourself via this link! – tinyurl.com/4tz6aufs
August 5, 2025 at 2:29 PM
🧵 2/6
Methods: We ran two experiments where participants rotated virtual cubes whilst trying to find a target T-shape amongst distractor L shapes.
💻 We utilised @threejs.org and @jspsych.org to make this possible. You can demo this yourself via this link! – tinyurl.com/4tz6aufs
Methods: We ran two experiments where participants rotated virtual cubes whilst trying to find a target T-shape amongst distractor L shapes.
💻 We utilised @threejs.org and @jspsych.org to make this possible. You can demo this yourself via this link! – tinyurl.com/4tz6aufs
Reposted by Prof Cheryl Metcalf
Ever fumbled through your bag for your keys? That’s an interactive search: moving objects to uncover obscured visual information.
In a new paper from our lab, we asked: What determines where people choose to look first in these tasks?
Spoiler: effort matters.
🔗 doi.org/10.3758/s134...
🧵1/6
In a new paper from our lab, we asked: What determines where people choose to look first in these tasks?
Spoiler: effort matters.
🔗 doi.org/10.3758/s134...
🧵1/6
Easy does it: Selection during interactive search tasks is biased towards objects that can be examined easily - Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
It is well understood that attentional selection is required to deploy visual attention to relevant objects within displays during visual search tasks. Interactive search, an extension of visual searc...
doi.org
August 5, 2025 at 2:29 PM
Ever fumbled through your bag for your keys? That’s an interactive search: moving objects to uncover obscured visual information.
In a new paper from our lab, we asked: What determines where people choose to look first in these tasks?
Spoiler: effort matters.
🔗 doi.org/10.3758/s134...
🧵1/6
In a new paper from our lab, we asked: What determines where people choose to look first in these tasks?
Spoiler: effort matters.
🔗 doi.org/10.3758/s134...
🧵1/6
Well, that’s one way to work at a weekend!
July 6, 2025 at 5:21 PM
Well, that’s one way to work at a weekend!
Fascinating introduction to the health system in Sri Lanka today from our excellent colleagues from the Commonwealth Fellowship and the University of Columbo.
July 4, 2025 at 10:05 AM
Fascinating introduction to the health system in Sri Lanka today from our excellent colleagues from the Commonwealth Fellowship and the University of Columbo.
Reposted by Prof Cheryl Metcalf
On World ME Day, congratulations Jodie Hamilton, winner of the Emerge Australia ME/CFS Awards for Excellence in Journalism vist.ly/3n3rpyr. Thank you, Emerge, for shortlisting my "Ignored, blamed, and sometimes left to die" article. theconversation.com/ignored-blam...
Ignored, blamed, and sometimes left to die – a leading expert in ME explains the origins of a modern medical scandal
The co-lead of the world’s largest ever genetic study into ME calls for a radical change in how society deals with the disease.
theconversation.com
May 12, 2025 at 7:18 AM
On World ME Day, congratulations Jodie Hamilton, winner of the Emerge Australia ME/CFS Awards for Excellence in Journalism vist.ly/3n3rpyr. Thank you, Emerge, for shortlisting my "Ignored, blamed, and sometimes left to die" article. theconversation.com/ignored-blam...
For Head Space week I’m taking a moment and have whisked my way up to London to @thekingsfund.bsky.social to hear Marshall Ganz talk about his new book: People Power Change : Organising for Democratic Renewal #booklaunch
May 12, 2025 at 8:41 AM
For Head Space week I’m taking a moment and have whisked my way up to London to @thekingsfund.bsky.social to hear Marshall Ganz talk about his new book: People Power Change : Organising for Democratic Renewal #booklaunch
Reposted by Prof Cheryl Metcalf
Relaxing day after a crazy few weeks!
May 3, 2025 at 2:36 PM
Relaxing day after a crazy few weeks!
Reposted by Prof Cheryl Metcalf
I have waited my whole life, for this moment....
April 28, 2025 at 7:05 PM
I have waited my whole life, for this moment....
Home for the weekend. What a beautiful thing to see approaching the station!
April 25, 2025 at 8:18 PM
Home for the weekend. What a beautiful thing to see approaching the station!