ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2021
Distractor probabilities modulate flanker task performance.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differential interference of body- and non-body-related representational conflicts on error and performance monitoring in flanker tasks.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Predicting Cognitive Outcome Through Nutrition and Health Markers Using Supervised Machine Learning.The Journal of nutrition · 2025Article
- Dynamic modulation of spatial selection: Online and anticipatory adjustments in the flanker task.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- Defining attention from an auditory perspective.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Expectations about upcoming events help humans to effectively filter out potential distractors and respond more efficiently to task-relevant inputs. While previous work has emphasized the role of expectations about task-relevant inputs, less is known about the role that expectations play in suppressing specific distractors. To address this question, we manipulated the probabilities of different flanker configurations in the Eriksen flanker task. Across four studies, we found robust evidence for sensitivity to the probability of flankers, with an approximately logarithmic relationship between the likelihood of a particular flanker configuration and the accuracy of subjects' responses. Subjects were also sensitive to length of runs of repeated targets, but minimally sensitive to length of runs of repeated flankers. Two studies used chevron stimuli, and two used letters (confirming that results generalize with greater dissimilarity between stimuli). Expanding the set of stimuli (thus reducing the dominance of any one exemplar) eliminated the effect. Our findings suggest that expectations about distractors form in response to statistical regularities at multiple timescales, and that their effects are strongest when stimuli are geometrically similar and subjects are able to respond to trials quickly. Unexpected distractors could disrupt performance, most likely via a form of attentional capture. This work demonstrates how expectations can influence attention in complex cognitive settings, and illuminates the multiple, nested factors that contribute.
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.