ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance2019
Incidental memory following rapid object processing: The role of attention allocation strategies.
Article in Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term memory for distractors: Effects of involuntary attention from working memory.Memory & cognition · 2024Article
- High target prevalence may reduce the spread of attention during search tasks.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024Article
- Differences in the duration of the attentional blink when viewing nature vs. urban scenes.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
- How does searching for faces among similar-looking distractors affect distractor memory?Memory & cognition · 2023Article
- Flexible attention allocation dynamically impacts incidental encoding in prospective memory.Memory & cognition · 2022Article
- The detail is in the difficulty: Challenging search facilitates rich incidental object encoding.Memory & cognition · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
When observers search for multiple (rather than singular) targets, they are slower and less accurate, yet have better incidental memory for nontarget items encountered during the task (Hout & Goldinger, 2010). One explanation for this may be that observers titrate their attention allocation based on the expected difficulty suggested by search cues. Difficult search cues may implicitly encourage observers to narrow their attention, simultaneously enhancing distractor encoding and hindering peripheral processing. Across three experiments, we manipulated the difficulty of search cues preceding passive visual search for real-world objects, using a Rapid Serial Visual Presentation (RSVP) task to equate item exposure durations. In all experiments, incidental memory was enhanced for distractors encountered while participants monitored for difficult targets. Moreover, in key trials, peripheral shapes appeared at varying eccentricities off center, allowing us to infer the spread and precision of participants' attentional windows. Peripheral item detection and identification decreased when search cues were difficult, even when the peripheral items appeared
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.