Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31826253›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2019

Stimulus visibility and uncertainty mediate the influence of attention on response bias and visual contrast appearance.

Sirawaj Itthipuripat, Kai-Yu Chang, Ashley Bong, John T Serences

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. An entropy model of decision uncertainty.Journal of mathematical psychology · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Dissociable Neural Mechanisms Underlie the Effects of Attention on Visual Appearance and Response Bias.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Exogenous spatial attention shortens perceived depth.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2020
    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

4 authors.

Sirawaj ItthipuripatLearning Institute, King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok, Thailand.
Kai-Yu ChangDepartment of Cognitive Science, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Ashley BongDepartment of Bioengineering, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
John T SerencesDepartment of Psychology and Neurosciences Graduate Program, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.

Funding

Adaptive population codes for flexible visually-guided behaviorsR01EY025872 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI John T Serences · 2016 to 2026
$4.5M
Adaptive allocation of attention during perception, working memory, and decisionR01MH092345 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI SERENCES, JOHN T · 2011 to 2015
$1.9M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY025872NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH092345
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although attention is known to improve the efficacy of sensory processing, the impact of attention on subjective visual appearance is still a matter of debate. Although recent studies suggest that attention can alter the appearance of stimulus contrast, others argue that these changes reflect response bias induced by attention cues. Here, we provide evidence that attention has effects on both appearance and response bias. In a comparative judgment task in which subjects reported whether the attended or unattended visual stimulus had a higher perceived contrast, attention induced substantial baseline-offset response bias as well as small but significant changes in subjective contrast appearance when subjects viewed near-threshold stimuli. However, when subjects viewed suprathreshold stimuli, baseline-offset response bias decreased and attention primarily changed contrast appearance. To address the possibility that these changes in appearance might be influenced by uncertainty due to the attended and unattended stimuli having similar physical contrasts, subjects performed an equality judgment task in which they reported if the contrast of the two stimuli was the same or different. We found that, although there were still attention-induced changes in contrast appearance at lower contrasts, the robust changes in contrast appearance at higher contrasts observed in the comparative judgment task were diminished in the equality judgment task. Together, these results suggest that attention can impact both response bias and appearance, and these two types of attention effects are differentially mediated by stimulus visibility and uncertainty. Collectively, these findings help constrain arguments about the cognitive penetrability of perception.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAttentionBiasContrast SensitivityCuesFemaleHumansJudgmentMalePhotic StimulationSensationUncertaintyVisual PerceptionYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31826253
PMCPMC6908139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.