Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36417127›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2023

Learning to suppress a distractor may not be unconscious.

Francisco Vicente-Conesa, Tamara Giménez-Fernández, David Luque, Miguel A Vadillo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2023. 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Francisco Vicente-ConesaDepartamento de Psicología Básica, Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 28049, Madrid, Spain.
Tamara Giménez-FernándezDepartamento de Psicología Básica, Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 28049, Madrid, Spain.
David LuqueDepartamento de Psicología Básica, Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 28049, Madrid, Spain.
Miguel A VadilloDepartamento de Psicología Básica, Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 28049, Madrid, Spain. miguel.vadillo@uam.es.

Funding

Consejería de Educación e Investigación 2020-5A/SOC-19723Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación PSI2017-85159-P
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The additional singleton task has become a popular paradigm to explore visual statistical learning and selective attention. In this task, participants are instructed to find a different-shaped target among a series of distractors as fast as possible. In some trials, the search display includes a singleton distractor with a different color, making search more difficult. This singleton distractor appears more often in one location than in the remaining locations. The typical results of these experiments show that participants learn to ignore the area of the screen that is more likely to contain the singleton distractor. It is often claimed that this learning takes place unconsciously, because at the end of the experiment participants seem to be unable to identify the location where the singleton distractor appeared most frequently during the task. In the present study, we tested participants' awareness in three high-powered experiments using alternative measures. Contrary to previous studies, the results show clear evidence of explicit knowledge about which area of the display was more likely to contain the singleton distractor, suggesting that this type of learning might not be unconscious.

Indexed as

AttentionSpatial LearningHumansReaction TimeAdditional singleton taskAwarenessDistractor suppressionImplicit learning

Identifiers

PMID36417127
PMCPMC10066157

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.