Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36114739›Full record

ArticlePsychophysiology2023

Irrelevant sights and sounds require spatial suppression: ERP evidence.

Jessica Lunn, Nick Berggren, Jamie Ward, Sophie Forster

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychophysiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Tracking the Misallocation and Reallocation of Spatial Attention toward Auditory Stimuli.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  2. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jessica LunnSchool of Psychology and Sussex Neuroscience, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5471-3362
Nick BerggrenDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1937-7938
Jamie WardSchool of Psychology and Sussex Neuroscience, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7007-1902
Sophie ForsterSchool of Psychology and Sussex Neuroscience, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6028-4821
University of Sussex · GBBirkbeck, University of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Both real-world experience and behavioral laboratory research suggest that entirely irrelevant stimuli (distractors) can interfere with a primary task. However, it is as yet unknown whether such interference reflects competition for spatial attention - indeed, prominent theories of attention predict that this should not be the case. Whilst electrophysiological indices of spatial capture and spatial suppression have been well-investigated, experiments have primarily utilized distractors which share a degree of task-relevance with targets, and are limited to the visual domain. The present research measured behavioral and ERP responses to test the ability of salient yet entirely task-irrelevant visual and auditory distractors to compete for spatial attention during a visual task, while also testing for potentially enhanced competition from multisensory distractors. Participants completed a central letter search task, while ignoring lateralized visual (e.g., image of a dog), auditory (e.g., barking), or multisensory (e.g., image + barking) distractors. Results showed that visual and multisensory distractors elicited a P

Indexed as

AttentionHumansReaction Timeattentional capturedistractionERPspdsuppressionvisual search

Identifiers

PMID36114739
PMCPMC10078104
OpenAlexW4296129649

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.