ArticleCerebral cortex communications2020
Modulation of the Earliest Component of the Human VEP by Spatial Attention: An Investigation of Task Demands.
Article in Cerebral cortex communications, 2020. 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.
- Readout and delayed transmission of initial afferent V1 activity in decisions about stimulus contrast.eLife · 2026Article
- Visual cortical area contributions to the transient, multifocal and steady-state VEP: A forward model-informed analysis.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
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
Spatial attention modulations of initial afferent activity in area V1, indexed by the first component "C1" of the human visual evoked potential, are rarely found. It has thus been suggested that early modulation is induced only by special task conditions, but what these conditions are remains unknown. Recent failed replications-findings of no C1 modulation using a certain task that had previously produced robust modulations-present a strong basis for examining this question. We ran 3 experiments, the first to more exactly replicate the stimulus and behavioral conditions of the original task, and the second and third to manipulate 2 key factors that differed in the failed replication studies: the provision of informative performance feedback, and the degree to which the probed stimulus features matched those facilitating target perception. Although there was an overall significant C1 modulation of 11%, individually, only experiments 1 and 2 showed reliable effects, underlining that the modulations do occur but not consistently. Better feedback induced greater P1, but not C1, modulations. Target-probe feature matching had an inconsistent influence on modulation patterns, with behavioral performance differences and signal-overlap analyses suggesting interference from extrastriate modulations as a potential cause.
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.