Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29073158›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

On the automaticity of relational stimulus processing: The (extrinsic) relational Simon task.

Adriaan Spruyt, Jan De Houwer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. 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.

Adriaan SpruytDepartment of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8387-631X
Jan De HouwerDepartment of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We introduce the (extrinsic) relational Simon task as a tool for capturing automatic relational stimulus processing. In three experiments, participants responded to a perceptual relation between two stimuli. Results showed that participants were faster and more accurate to respond when the (task-irrelevant) conceptual relation between these stimuli was compatible (rather than incompatible) with the (extrinsic) relational meaning of the required responses. This effect was replicated irrespective of the type of stimulus materials used, irrespective of the similarity between the relational information that was task-relevant and the relational information that was task-irrelevant, and irrespective of the complexity of the task-irrelevant relational information. Our findings add to a growing body of evidence showing that relational stimulus processing can occur under conditions of automaticity.

Indexed as

Task Performance and AnalysisAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29073158
PMCPMC5658055

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.