English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

We employed eye-tracking to investigate how performing different tasks on scenes (e.g., intentionally memorizing them, searching for an object, evaluating aesthetic preference) can affect eye movements during encoding and subsequent scene memory. We found that scene memorability decreased after visual search (one incidental encoding task) compared to intentional memorization, and that preference evaluation (another incidental encoding task) produced better memory, similar to the incidental memory boost previously observed for words and faces. By analyzing fixation maps, we found that although fixation map similarity could explain how eye movements during visual search impairs incidental scene memory, it could not explain the incidental memory boost from aesthetic preference evaluation, implying that implicit mechanisms were at play. We conclude that not all incidental encoding tasks should be taken to be similar, as different mechanisms (e.g., explicit or implicit) lead to memory enhancements or decrements for different incidental encoding tasks.

To search or to like: Mapping fixations to differentiate two forms of incidental scene memory