Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34330776›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2021

History Modulates Early Sensory Processing of Salient Distractors.

Kirsten C S Adam, John T Serences

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Signal suppression makes search less effortful.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Rapid Inversion of Singleton Distractor Representations Underlies Learned Attentional Suppression.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Distributed and drifting signals for working memory load in human cortex.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  11. Learning Modulates Early Encephalographic Responses to Distracting Stimuli: A Combined SSVEP and ERP Study.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Feature-Specific Salience Maps in Human Cortex.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Kirsten C S AdamDepartment of Psychology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093 kadam@ucsd.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-4950-327X
John T SerencesDepartment of Psychology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093.ORCID 0000-0002-8551-5147

Funding

TRAINING PROGRAM IN COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCET32MH020002 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI SEJNOWSKI, TERRENCE J · 1999 to 2020
$6.1M
Adaptive population codes for flexible visually-guided behaviorsR01EY025872 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI John T Serences · 2016 to 2026
$4.5M
Training Program In Visual NeuroscienceT32EY020503 · NEI · SALK INSTITUTE FOR BIOLOGICAL STUDIES · PI ALBRIGHT, THOMAS D · 2011 to 2020
$1.5M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY025872NEI NIH HHS T32 EY020503NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH020002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To find important objects, we must focus on our goals, ignore distractions, and take our changing environment into account. This is formalized in models of visual search whereby goal-driven, stimulus-driven, and history-driven factors are integrated into a priority map that guides attention. Stimulus history robustly influences where attention is allocated even when the physical stimulus is the same: when a salient distractor is repeated over time, it captures attention less effectively. A key open question is how we come to ignore salient distractors when they are repeated. Goal-driven accounts propose that we use an active, expectation-driven mechanism to attenuate the distractor signal (e.g., predictive coding), whereas stimulus-driven accounts propose that the distractor signal is attenuated because of passive changes to neural activity and inter-item competition (e.g., adaptation). To test these competing accounts, we measured item-specific fMRI responses in human visual cortex during a visual search task where trial history was manipulated (colors unpredictably switched or were repeated). Consistent with a stimulus-driven account of history-based distractor suppression, we found that repeated singleton distractors were suppressed starting in V1, and distractor suppression did not increase in later visual areas. In contrast, we observed signatures of goal-driven target enhancement that were absent in V1, increased across visual areas, and were not modulated by stimulus history. Our data suggest that stimulus history does not alter goal-driven expectations, but rather modulates canonically stimulus-driven sensory responses to contribute to a temporally integrated representation of priority.

Indexed as

AdultAttentionBrainFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeuropsychological TestsPattern Recognition, VisualReaction TimeVisual CortexVisual PerceptionYoung Adultattentional selectionfMRIprioritysaliencevisual search

Identifiers

PMID34330776
PMCPMC8460139

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.