ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
Directing memory content to attentional templates: The finiteness effect of predictive information.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Visual search can be accelerated according to the properties of information stored in memory and prior knowledge of the upcoming work. This helps the searcher direct their attention to (or avoid) items that match these properties. Meanwhile, different functional areas where these properties exist become attentional templates. Compared with neutral conditions, the use of attentional templates significantly benefits reaction time (RT). However, previous studies might have confounded the memory-driven and cue-driven effects. Thus, it is less clear which factor influences the template benefits. Modeled on previous research, this study employed a new design to explore the independent effects of textual cues, thus finding an inverse effect. More specifically, positively cueing an item retained in memory did not improve behavioral performance, whereas negatively cueing an item did achieve such an enhancement. Moreover, positive cueing even resulted in some damage to attentional searching under some conditions, thus indicating that the advantages of positive cueing reported in previous studies may be driven by working memory, while the effects of negative cueing are driven by prior knowledge.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.