Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36354413›Full record

ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2022

The Rejection Template of Working Memory Operates after Attention Capture.

Jiachen Lu, Jing Wang, Weidong Li, Jingjing Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 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
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

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

4 authors.

Jiachen LuSchool of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510631, China.
Jing WangSchool of Physical Education, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, China.
Weidong LiSchool of Physical Education, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, China.
Jingjing LiSchool of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510631, China.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 31871106
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although scientists know that information stored in working memory guides visual attention, how this is accomplished is still under debate. Specifically, there is a dispute between the Biased Competition Model and Visual Attention Theory. The current study used two experiments to resolve this controversy based on previous research. Experiment 1 found that although inverse efficiency scores for High and Low numbers of memory distractors were both longer than the Baseline (no memory distractors), they did not significantly differ from each other. This indicated that memory might guide attention via a capture-then-global-inhibition process. Experiment 2 addressed the possibility that the findings resulted from the time needed to reject the interfering objects by requiring both memory-matching and memory-mismatching conditions to be rejected under a highlighted target. This result showed that the memory-matching condition resulted in longer search times than the memory-mismatching condition, indicating an attention-capture effect based on working memory. Together, the two experiments support the idea that when multiple memory-matching distractors in a search array first capture an individual's attention, it then acts as a template that allows the individual to suppress all interfering items that containing memory information holds. This study supports the Biased Competition Model early on in visual search. However, the late stage of visual search supports the Visual Attention Theory. These advance our knowledge regarding the relationship between working memory content and attention.

Indexed as

attention captureattention suppressionbiased competition modelvisual attention theoryworking memory

Identifiers

PMID36354413
PMCPMC9687071

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.