Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26473316›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2015

Stimulus competition mediates the joint effects of spatial and feature-based attention.

Alex L White, Martin Rolfs, Marisa Carrasco

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. In search of exogenous feature-based attention.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2020
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Attention Alters Population Spatial Frequency Tuning.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. The time course of feature-selective attention inside and outside the focus of spatial attention.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Alex L White
Martin Rolfs
Marisa Carrasco

Funding

Vision Core Grant- Design and Fabrication ModuleP30EY013079 · NEI · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI MOVSHON, J ANTHONY · 2000 to 2025
$14.2M
TRAINING IN VISUAL NEUROSCIENCET32EY007136 · NEI · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI J ANTHONY MOVSHON · 1993 to 2026
$5.3M
Temporal Dynamics of Visual Perception and AttentionR01EY019693 · NEI · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI CARRASCO, MARISA · 2010 to 2022
$4.0M
Effects of covert attention on early visionR01EY016200 · NEI · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI CARRASCO, MARISA · 2006 to 2013
$1.8M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY013079NEI NIH HHS R01 EY016200NEI NIH HHS R01 EY019693NEI NIH HHS R01-EY-019693NEI NIH HHS R01-EY-16200NEI NIH HHS T32 EY007136
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Distinct attentional mechanisms enhance the sensory processing of visual stimuli that appear at task-relevant locations and have task-relevant features. We used a combination of psychophysics and computational modeling to investigate how these two types of attention--spatial and feature based--interact to modulate sensitivity when combined in one task. Observers monitored overlapping groups of dots for a target change in color saturation, which they had to localize as being in the upper or lower visual hemifield. Pre-cues indicated the target's most likely location (left/right), color (red/green), or both location and color. We measured sensitivity (d') for every combination of the location cue and the color cue, each of which could be valid, neutral, or invalid. When three competing saturation changes occurred simultaneously with the target change, there was a clear interaction: The spatial cueing effect was strongest for the cued color, and the color cueing effect was strongest at the cued location. In a second experiment, only the target dot group changed saturation, such that stimulus competition was low. The resulting cueing effects were statistically independent and additive: The color cueing effect was equally strong at attended and unattended locations. We account for these data with a computational model in which spatial and feature-based attention independently modulate the gain of sensory responses, consistent with measurements of cortical activity. Multiple responses then compete via divisive normalization. Sufficient competition creates interactions between the two cueing effects, although the attentional systems are themselves independent. This model helps reconcile seemingly disparate behavioral and physiological findings.

Indexed as

AdultAttentionComputer SimulationCuesFemaleHumansMalePsychophysicsReaction TimeSpatial ProcessingVisual CortexVisual PerceptionYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26473316
PMCPMC5077277

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.