Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35265006›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

Effects of Attention Direction and Perceptual Distraction Within Visual Working Memory.

Weixi Zheng, Liping Jia, Nana Sun, Yu Liu, Jiayang Geng, Dexiang Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Weixi ZhengWeifang Medical University, Weifang, China.
Liping JiaWeifang Medical University, Weifang, China.
Nana SunLuliang University, Lüliang, China.
Yu LiuWeifang Medical University, Weifang, China.
Jiayang GengWeifang Medical University, Weifang, China.
Dexiang ZhangWeifang Medical University, Weifang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although substantial evidence demonstrates that directing attention to specific items is important for improving the performance of visual working memory (VWM), it is still not clear whether the attended items were better protected. The present study, thus, adopted a pre-cueing paradigm to examine the effect of attention direction and perceptual distractor on VWM. The results showed that a valid visual cue improved the individuals' VWM performances and reduced their reaction time compared to the invalid and neutral cues. However, the VWM performances in the valid and neutral cue conditions were more disrupted by a post-stimuli distractor compared to the invalid cue condition. The findings suggest that although directing attention can improve the VWM performance, it is not efficient in protecting information from being distracted.

Indexed as

attention directionpost-stimuli distractorpre-visual cuethe focus of attentionvisual working memory

Identifiers

PMID35265006
PMCPMC8898948

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.