Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33912338›Full record

Articlei-Perception

A Search Advantage for Horizontal Targets in Dynamic Displays.

Ian M Thornton, Quoc C Vuong, Karin S Pilz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in i-Perception. 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.

Ian M ThorntonDepartment of Cognitive Science, Faculty of Media and Knowledge Sciences, University of Malta, Msida, Malta.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6328-3536
Quoc C VuongBiosciences Institute, School of Psychology, Newcastle University, UK.
Karin S PilzDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Groningen, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4566-9122

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several lines of evidence point to the existence of a visual processing advantage for horizontal over vertical orientations. We investigated whether such a horizontal advantage exists in the context of top-down visual search. Inspired by change detection studies, we created displays where a dynamic target -- a horizontal or a vertical group of five dots that changed contrast synchronously -- was embedded within a randomly flickering grid of dots. The display size (total dots) varied across trials, and the orientation of the target was constant within interleaved blocks. As expected, search was slow and inefficient. Importantly, participants were almost a second faster finding horizontal compared to vertical targets. They were also more efficient and more accurate during horizontal search. Such findings establish that the attentional templates thought to guide search for known targets can exhibit strong orientation anisotropies. We discuss possible underlying mechanisms and how these might be explored in future studies.

Indexed as

anisotropyattentionhorizontal advantageorientationvisual search

Identifiers

PMID33912338
PMCPMC8047869

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.