Problems in visual confirmation arises when there is no clear and specific claim defined for ending, and having no claim to start with. One of the typical problems in taking this approach is with patternicities.
Patternicities are finding meaningful patterns in meaningless noise. Proximate cause of this is due to priming effect, in which our brain and senses are prepared to interpret stimuli according to expected model. If we fall into this trap, we land up in visual discovery. During this process, we proceed towards the claim by comparing it with our mental model. This is a random approach with a hope of finding a meaningful pattern in a meaningless noise.
Therefore, we find ourselves in investigating and exploring the problem, instead of investigating and exploiting the problem. Solution to this problem is that we have to proceed systematically by first clearly defining the claim-the visual confirmation, and the claim to start with. Then we approach this way in a continuum basis by finding the differences in between those claims.
If there is no differences then this leads to confounding situations that need to be addressed systematically as well. We have take the divergence approach by first listing out all the options that can possibly lead to our claim, We have to then test each of those claims by matching to our final claim. Now we prioritize all the options we have tested and converge to the final claim to give the final visual confirmation.
Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/patternicity-finding-meaningful-patterns/