Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32441736›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2020

Multiple object-tracking isolates feedback-specific load in attention and learning.

Domenico Tullo, Chiara Perico, Jocelyn Faubert, Armando Bertone

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Domenico Tullo,.
Chiara Perico,.
Jocelyn Faubert,.
Armando Bertone,.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Feedback is beneficial for learning. Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether (i) feedback draws attentional resources when integrated and (ii) the benefits of feedback for learning can be demonstrated using an attention-based task. We therefore (i) isolated feedback-specific load from task-specific load via individual differences in attention resource capacity and (ii) examined the effect of trial-by-trial feedback (i.e., present vs. absent) on learning a multiple object-tracking (MOT) paradigm. We chose MOT because it is a robust measure of attention resource capacity. In Study 1 participants tracked one (i.e., lowest attentional load condition) through four target items (i.e., highest load condition) among eight total items. One group (n = 32) received trial-by-trial feedback whereas the other group (n = 32) did not. The absence of feedback resulted in better MOT performance compared with the presence of feedback. Moreover, the difference in MOT capability between groups increased as the task-specific attentional load increased. These findings suggest that feedback integration requires attentional resources. Study 2 examined whether the absence (n = 19) or presence (n = 19) of feedback affects learning on the same MOT task across four testing days. When holding task-specific load constant, improvement in MOT was greater with feedback than without. Although this study is the first to isolate feedback-specific load in attention with MOT, more evidence is needed to demonstrate how the benefits of feedback translate to improvement on an attention-based task. These findings encourage future research to further explore the interaction between feedback, attention and learning.

Indexed as

Feedback, SensoryAdultAttentionCognitionFemaleHumansLearningMaleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID32441736
PMCPMC7409588

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.