ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2021
Nontarget emotional stimuli must be highly conspicuous to modulate the attentional blink.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Crisis-related stimuli do not increase the emotional attentional blink in a general university student population.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024Article
- jsQuestPlus: A JavaScript implementation of the QUEST+ method for estimating psychometric function parameters in online experiments.Behavior research methods · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The attentional blink (AB) is often considered a top-down phenomenon because it is triggered by matching an initial target (T1) in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) stream to a search template. However, the AB is modulated when targets are emotional, and is evoked when a task-irrelevant, emotional critical distractor (CDI) replaces T1. Neither manipulation fully captures the interplay between bottom-up and top-down attention in the AB: Valenced targets intrinsically conflate top-down and bottom-up attention. The CDI approach cannot manipulate second target (T2) valence, which is critical because valenced T2s can "break through" the AB (in the target-manipulation approach). The present research resolves this methodological challenge by indirectly measuring whether a purely bottom-up CDI can modulate report of a subsequent T2. This novel approach adds a valenced CDI to the "classic," two-target AB. Participants viewed RSVP streams containing a T1-CDI pair preceding a variable lag to T2. If the CDI's valence is sufficient to survive the AB, it should modulate T2 performance, indirectly signaling bottom-up capture by an emotional stimulus. Contrary to this prediction, CDI valence only affected the AB when CDIs were also extremely visually conspicuous. Thus, emotional valence alone is insufficient to modulate the AB.
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.