Haden Dewis
@hadendewis.bsky.social
PhD student at the University of Southampton, UK — researching cognitive psychology, specifically interactive search — or more colloquially, how people search for things using their hands and eyes 👋🏼👀
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
🧵 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...
🧵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.
🧵 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.
🧵 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.
🧵 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