Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33506355›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2021

Typicality modulates attentional capture by object categories.

Y Isabella Lim, Andrew Clement, Jay Pratt

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Y Isabella LimDepartment of Psychology, University of Toronto, 100 St George St, Toronto, ON, M5S 3G3, Canada. isabella.lim@mail.utoronto.ca.
Andrew ClementDepartment of Psychology, University of Toronto, 100 St George St, Toronto, ON, M5S 3G3, Canada.
Jay PrattDepartment of Psychology, University of Toronto, 100 St George St, Toronto, ON, M5S 3G3, Canada.

Funding

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Discovery Grant 2016-06359
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

What we pay attention to in the visual environment is often driven by what we know about the world. For example, a number of studies have found that observers can adopt attentional sets for a particular semantic category. However, some objects are more typical members of a category than others. While previous evidence suggests that an object's typicality can influence the guidance of attention in visual search, it is unclear whether typicality can also influence the capture of attention. To test whether this is the case, participants were given a category of objects at the beginning of each trial. Then, a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) stream was presented at fixation, and participants had to indicate whether an object of the given category was present or absent from the stream. Importantly, a single flanker image also appeared above or below the central stream just before the target. This flanker could belong either to the same category as the target or a different category, and could be a typical or atypical exemplar of that category. Participants were less accurate at detecting the target when the flanker belonged to the same category as the target. Moreover, participants were even less accurate when the flanker was a typical exemplar of this category. Similar findings were observed when targets consisted of typical and atypical exemplars. Together, these findings indicate that the extent of attentional capture toward a distractor depends on whether the distractor matches the category and typicality of one's attentional set.

Indexed as

SemanticsHumansAttentional captureCategorizationMemory: Long-term memory

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.