ArticleScientific reports2020
Task-based memory systems in contextual-cueing of visual search and explicit recognition.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Withstand Context: Standing Posture Improves Contextual Cueing in Challenging Visual Search.Psychophysiology · 2025Article
- Modeling the dynamics of contextual cueing effect by reinforcement learning.Journal of vision · 2024Article
- No evidence for contextual cueing beyond explicit recognition.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Article
- Emotional modulation of statistical learning in visual search.Frontiers in cognition · 2024Article
- The effect of task-irrelevant objects in spatial contextual cueing.Frontiers in cognition · 2024Article
- Contextual cueing of visual search reflects the acquisition of an optimal, one-for-all oculomotor scanning strategy.Communications psychology · 2023Article
- Learning to suppress a distractor may not be unconscious.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
- Why Are Acquired Search-Guiding Context Memories Resistant to Updating?Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Visual search is facilitated when observers encounter targets in repeated display arrangements. This 'contextual-cueing' (CC) effect is attributed to incidental learning of spatial distractor-target relations. Prior work has typically used only one recognition measure (administered after the search task) to establish whether CC is based on implicit or explicit memory of repeated displays, with the outcome depending on the diagnostic accuracy of the test. The present study compared two explicit memory tests to tackle this issue: yes/no recognition of a given search display as repeated versus generation of the quadrant in which the target (which was replaced by a distractor) had been located during the search task, thus closely matching the processes involved in performing the search. While repeated displays elicited a CC effect in the search task, both tests revealed above-chance knowledge of repeated displays, though explicit-memory accuracy and its correlation with contextual facilitation in the search task were more pronounced for the generation task. These findings argue in favor of a one-system, explicit-memory account of CC. Further, they demonstrate the superiority of the generation task for revealing the explicitness of CC, likely because both the search and the memory task involve overlapping processes (in line with 'transfer-appropriate processing').
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.