ArticleJournal of eye movement research2020
To look or not to look: Subliminal abruptonset cues influence constrained free-choice saccades.
Article in Journal of eye movement research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Subliminal meaning-contingent attentional orienting: The role of attentional control setting based on displaywide features.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Subliminal cues have been shown to capture attention and modulate manual response behaviour but their impact on eye movement behaviour is not well-studied. In two experiments, we examined if subliminal cues influence constrained free-choice saccades and if this influence is under strategic control as a function of task-relevancy of the cues. On each trial, a display containing four filled circles at the centre of each quadrant was shown. A central coloured circle indicated the relevant visual field on each trial (Up or Down in Experiment 1; Left or Right in Experiment 2). Next, abrupt-onset cues were presented for 16 ms at one of the four locations. Participants were then asked to freely choose and make a saccade to one of the two target circles in the relevant visual field. The analysis of the frequency of saccades, saccade endpoint deviation and saccade latency revealed a significant influence of the relevant subliminal cues on saccadic decisions. Latency data showed reduced capture by spatiallyirrelevant cues under some conditions. These results indicate that spatial attentional control settings as defined in our study could modulate the influence of subliminal abrupt-onset cues on eye movement behaviour. We situate the findings of this study in the attention-capture debate and discuss the implications for the subliminal cueing literature.
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.