ArticleCognitive processing2022
Comparing the temporal dynamics and efficacy of task-relevant and task-irrelevant memory-driven attention.
Article in Cognitive processing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Congruent audiovisual stimulation drives efficient guidance of attention by memory-irrelevant features.Cognitive processing · 2026Article
- Long-term mind-body exercise enhances cognitive control over working memory-driven attentional capture.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Active maintenance of working memory contents affects functioning of attentional filtering.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
People's attention is well attracted to a stimulus matching their memory. For example, when people are required to remember the color of a visual object, stimuli matching the memory color powerfully capture attention. Remarkably, stimuli with the shape of the memory object, that is, irrelevant-matching stimuli were also found to capture attention. Here, we examined how task relevance affects the temporal dynamics and the strength of memory-driven attention. In the experiment, participants performed a visual search task while maintaining the color or shape of a colored shape. When participants were required to memorize the color of the memory sample, the shape of the sample stimulus is task-irrelevant feature and vice versa. Importantly, while a search item matching working memory in the task-relevant dimension was presented for one group of participants, an irrelevant-matching search item appeared for the other group of participants. Further, we varied stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between the memory sample and search items. We found that relevant-matching stimuli captured attention regardless of whether the SOA was short or long. However, attentional capture by irrelevant-matching stimuli depended on the SOA; no memory-driven capture was observed at the shortest SOA, but significant capture was found at longer SOAs. Further, the capture effects by relevant-matching stimuli were greater than that of irrelevant-matching stimuli. These findings suggest both task-relevant and -irrelevant features in working memory affect the attentional selection in visual search task, but its temporal dynamics and strength are modulated by the task-relevance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35001208What 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.