Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36471230›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2023

Adaptive visual selection in feature space.

Taosheng Liu, Ming W H Fang, Sari Saba-Sadiya

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 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
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Shape-similarity gain: A selection profile for simple objects.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026
    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

3 authors.

Taosheng LiuDepartment of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA. tsliu@msu.edu.
Ming W H FangDepartment of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA.
Sari Saba-SadiyaDepartment of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Visual perception relies on efficient selection of task-relevant information for prioritized processing. A prevalent mode of selection is feature-based selection, and a key question in the literature is the shape of the selection profile-that is, when a feature is selected, what is the landscape of priority for all features in that dimension? Past studies have reported conflicting findings with both monotonic and nonmonotonic profiles. We hypothesized that feature selection can be adaptively adjusted based on stimulus factors (feature competition) and task demands (selection precision). In three experiments, we manipulated these contextual factors in a central task while measuring selection profile in a peripheral task. We found a nonmonotonic, surround suppression, profile when feature competition and selection precision was high, but observed a monotonic profile when these factors were low. Furthermore, manipulation of selection precision alone can shape selection profile independent of feature competition. These findings reconcile previous conflicting results and importantly, demonstrate that feature selection is highly adaptive, allowing flexible allocation of processing resources to ensure efficient extraction of visual information.

Indexed as

AttentionVisual PerceptionCuesHumansAttentionControlFeatureVision

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.