Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34282562›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2022

Stimulus variability and task relevance modulate binding-learning.

Nithin George, Tobias Egner

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Nithin GeorgeCentre for Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar, 382355, Gujarat, India. n.george@iitgn.ac.in.
Tobias EgnerDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27708, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Classical theories of attention posit that integration of features into object representation (or feature binding) requires engagement of focused attention. Studies challenging this idea have demonstrated that feature binding can happen outside of the focus of attention for familiar objects, as well as for arbitrary color-orientation conjunctions. Detection performance for arbitrary feature conjunction improves with training, suggesting a potential role of perceptual learning mechanisms in the integration of features, a process called "binding-learning". In the present study, we investigate whether stimulus variability and task relevance, two critical determinants of visual perceptual learning, also modulate binding-learning. Transfer of learning in a visual search task to a pre-exposed color-orientation conjunction was assessed under conditions of varying stimulus variability and task relevance. We found transfer of learning for the pre-exposed feature conjunctions that were trained with high variability (Experiment 1). Transfer of learning was not observed when the conjunction was rendered task-irrelevant during training due to pop-out targets (Experiment 2). Our findings show that feature binding is determined by principles of perceptual learning, and they support the idea that functions traditionally attributed to goal-driven attention can be grounded in the learning of the statistical structure of the environment.

Indexed as

AttentionVisual PerceptionHumansSpatial LearningFeature bindingHabitual attentionPerceptual learningVariabilityVisual search

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.