ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2022
Simulated central vision loss does not impair implicit location probability learning when participants search through simple displays.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Social and non-social directional cues differentially orient attention by learned habit.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Central vision loss disrupts voluntary shifts of spatial attention during visual search. Recently, we reported that a simulated scotoma impaired learned spatial attention towards regions likely to contain search targets. In that task, search items were overlaid on natural scenes. Because natural scenes can induce explicit awareness of learned biases leading to voluntary shifts of attention, here we used a search display with a blank background less likely to induce awareness of target location probabilities. Participants searched both with and without a simulated central scotoma: a training phase contained targets more often in one screen quadrant and a testing phase contained targets equally often in all quadrants. In Experiment 1, training used no scotoma, while testing alternated between blocks of scotoma and no-scotoma search. Experiment 2 training included the scotoma and testing again alternated between scotoma and no-scotoma search. Response times and saccadic behaviors in both experiments showed attentional biases towards the high-probability target quadrant during scotoma and no-scotoma search. Whereas simulated central vision loss impairs learned spatial attention in the context of natural scenes, our results show that this may not arise from impairments to the basic mechanisms of attentional learning indexed by visual search tasks without scenes.
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.