Visually guided computer-mouse clicking interferes with multiple-object tracking (MOT)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many everyday tasks require coordinated action towards specific items moving among others (e.g. touching, pointing). Pylyshyn (2001) proposed that multiple-object tracking (MOT), the ability to monitor positions of specific target items as they move among others, is an integral part of coordinated action towards targets. In support of this, Terry & Trick (2021) found that when participants were required to touch any moving item that changed colour (visually guided touch) it not only interfered with MOT – but it interfered differentially, with less interference for touching items that changed colour if they were also targets in MOT. However, direct touch may represent a special case. In this study, we attempted to replicate the finding using a different coordinated action: computer-mouse clicks. Participants tracked 2-3 targets in MOT while clicking any item that changed colour. Mouse-clicking also interfered differentially with MOT, which suggests a common mechanism may underlie these processes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".