Conclusions
2D and 3D tasks show similar weighting patterns between 2D images and the central slice of 3D images. There is relatively little weighting across slices in the 3D tasks, leading to lower task efficiency with respect to the ideal observer.
Purpose
Three-dimensional "volumetric" imaging
Results
In 3D tasks, median response times were roughly nine times longer than 2D, with larger relative differences for incorrect trials. The efficiency data show a dissociation in which subjects perform with higher statistical efficiency in 2D tasks for large targets and higher efficiency in 3D tasks with small targets. The classification images suggest that a critical mechanism behind this dissociation is an inability to integrate across multiple slices to form a 3D localization response. The central slices of 3D classification images are remarkably similar to the corresponding 2D classification images. Conclusions: 2D and 3D tasks show similar weighting patterns between 2D images and the central slice of 3D images. There is relatively little weighting across slices in the 3D tasks, leading to lower task efficiency with respect to the ideal observer.