Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35313163›Full record

ArticleVision research2022

Negative cues minimize visual search specificity effects.

Ashley M Phelps, Robert G Alexander, Joseph Schmidt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vision research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. How expectations alter search performance.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

3 authors.

Ashley M PhelpsDepartment of Psychology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
Robert G AlexanderDepartments of Ophthalmology, Neurology, and Physiology & Pharmacology, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY, USA.
Joseph SchmidtDepartment of Psychology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA. Electronic address: joseph.schmidt@ucf.edu.

Funding

Novel Perceptual and Oculomotor Heuristics for Enhancing Radiologic PerformanceR01CA258021 · NCI · SUNY DOWNSTATE MEDICAL CENTER · PI MACKNIK, STEPHEN LOUIS, MARTINEZ-CONDE, SUSANA · 2021 to 2025
$2.9M
Visual cortical mechanisms for the perception of self-generated vs. external motionR01EY031971 · NEI · SUNY DOWNSTATE MEDICAL CENTER · PI Stephen Louis Macknik, Susana Martinez-Conde · 2020 to 2026
$2.2M
Visual search following explicit or implicit category rule trainingR15EY029511 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA · PI SCHMIDT, JOSEPH C · 2018 to 2019
$398k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA258021NEI NIH HHS R01 EY031971NEI NIH HHS R15 EY029511
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prior target knowledge (i.e., positive cues) improves visual search performance. However, there is considerable debate about whether distractor knowledge (i.e., negative cues) can guide search. Some studies suggest the active suppression of negatively cued search items, while others suggest the initial capture of attention by negatively cued items. Prior work has used pictorial or specific text cues but has not explicitly compared them. We build on that work by comparing positive and negative cues presented pictorially and as categorical text labels using photorealistic objects and eye movement measures. Search displays contained a target (cued on positive trials), a lure from the target category (cued on negative trials), and four categorically-unrelated distractors. Search performance with positive cues resulted in stronger attentional guidance and faster object recognition for pictorial relative to categorical cues (i.e., a pictorial advantage, suggesting specific visual details afforded by pictorial cues improved search). However, in most search performance metrics, negative cues mitigate the pictorial advantage. Given that the negatively cued items captured attention, generated target guidance but mitigated the pictorial advantage, these results are partly consistent with both existing theories. Specific visual details provided in positive cues produce a large pictorial advantage in all measures, whereas specific visual details in negative cues only produce a small pictorial advantage for object recognition but not for attentional guidance. This asymmetry in the pictorial advantage suggests that the down-weighting of specific negatively cued visual features is less efficient than the up-weighting of specific positively cued visual features.

Indexed as

AttentionCuesEye MovementsHumansReaction TimeVisual PerceptionAttentional CaptureCategorical CuesGuidanceNegative CuesPictorial CuesTarget TemplatesVisual Search

Identifiers

PMID35313163
PMCPMC9090971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.