Attenuating the 'attentional white bear' effect enhances suppressive attention.

Alex Muhl-Richardson, Maria Tortosa-Molina, Sergio A Recio, Maximilian G Parker, Greg J Davis

Open access · hybridAbstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 50% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alex Muhl-RichardsonDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EB, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5673-4052

Maria Tortosa-MolinaDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EB, UK.

Sergio A RecioDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EB, UK.

Maximilian G ParkerDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EB, UK.

Greg J DavisDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EB, UK. gjd1000@cam.ac.uk.

University of Cambridge · GBRoyal Military Academy Sandhurst · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Trying to ignore an object can bias attention towards it - a phenomenon referred to as the 'attentional white bear' (AWB) effect. The mechanisms behind this effect remain unclear. On one hand, the AWB may reflect reactive, 'search and destroy' distractor suppression, which directs attention toward irrelevant objects in order to suppress further attention to them. However, another possibility is that the AWB results from failed proactive distractor suppression - attempting to suppress attention to an irrelevant object from the outset may inadvertently result in an attentional shift towards it. To distinguish these two possibilities, we developed a categorical visual search task that addresses limitations present in prior studies. In five experiments (N

Indexed as

CuesHumansMemory, Short-TermReaction TimeVisual PerceptionAttentionAttentional white bearEye movementsSuppressionVisual search

Identifiers

PMID36138299

DOI10.3758/s13414-022-02560-w

PMCPMC9630199

OpenAlexW4296801601

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.