Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30953082›Full record

ArticleExperimental brain research2019

The gap effect reduces both manual and saccadic inhibition of return (IOR).

Łukasz Michalczyk, Jacek Bielas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental brain research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Łukasz MichalczykInstitute of Psychology, Jesuit University Ignatianum in Krakow, Kopernika 26, 31-501, Krakow, Poland. lukasz.michalczyk@ignatianum.edu.pl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3174-0832
Jacek BielasInstitute of Psychology, Jesuit University Ignatianum in Krakow, Kopernika 26, 31-501, Krakow, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inhibition of return (IOR) is the effect of slower responses to validly than invalidly cued targets. The discovery of IOR raised controversy as to whether it has two "flavors", i.e., attentional/perceptual and motoric, or whether it is a homogeneous visual-motor phenomenon that should be understood in terms of the preparation of different effectors (mainly eye movement). Since manipulation of fixation offset (0 and 200 ms gap) is believed to affect the latency of saccades, we measured its influence on saccadic and manual IOR with a simple keypress response when eye movements were forbidden. In the two experiments which we carried out, the fixation offset decreased IOR in both the saccadic and the manual conditions. The results suggest the limitations of the attentional hypothesis, which assumes that manual IOR is independent of the motoric component; they are also in line with the tenets of the oculomotor hypothesis of IOR.

Indexed as

Inhibition, PsychologicalAttentionEye MovementsFemaleHumansMalePhotic StimulationPsychomotor PerformanceReaction TimeSaccadesYoung AdultEye movementsInhibition of returnSelection-for-actionSelection-for-perceptionVisual attention

Identifiers

PMID30953082
PMCPMC6584218

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.