Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24927282›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2014

On the importance of relative salience: comparing overt selection behavior of single versus simultaneously presented stimuli.

Alisha Siebold, Mieke Donk

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Alisha SieboldDepartment of Cognitive Psychology, Free University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Mieke DonkDepartment of Cognitive Psychology, Free University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The goal of the current study was to investigate time-dependent effects of the number of targets presented and its interaction with stimulus salience on oculomotor selection performance. To this end, observers were asked to make a speeded eye movement to a target orientation singleton embedded in a homogeneous background of vertically oriented lines. In Experiment 1, either one or two physically identical targets were presented, whereas in Experiment 2 an additional orientation-based salience manipulation was performed. The results showed that the probability of a singleton being available for selection is reduced in the presence of an identical singleton (Experiment 1) and that this effect is modulated by the salience of the other singleton (Experiment 2). While the absolute orientation contrast of a target relative to the background contributed to the probability that it is available for selection, the crucial factor affecting selection was the relative salience between singletons. These findings are incompatible with a processing speed account, which highlights the importance of visibility and claims that a certain singleton identity has a unique speed with which it can be processed. In contrast, the finding that the number of targets presented affected a target's availability suggests an important role of the broader display context in determining oculomotor selection performance.

Indexed as

AdultEye MovementsFemaleHumansMaleOrientationPhotic StimulationReaction TimeVisual PerceptionYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID24927282
PMCPMC4057253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.