Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36725782›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2023

Revisiting the role of attention in the "weapon focus effect": Do weapons draw gaze away from the perpetrator under naturalistic viewing conditions?

Hannes M Körner, Franz Faul, Antje Nuthmann

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. Psychological factors of offender decision-making in body disposal: Further considerations to apply to a 'Winthrop' model.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2026
    Article
  3. Four (and a Half) Preregistered Failures to Replicate the Weapon Focus Effect in Online Samples.Psychology, public policy, and law : an official law review of the University of Arizona College of Law and the University of Miami School of Law · 2025
    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

3 authors.

Hannes M KörnerInstitute of Psychology, Kiel University, Olshausenstr. 62, 24118, Kiel, Germany. koerner@psychologie.uni-kiel.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3509-9453
Franz FaulInstitute of Psychology, Kiel University, Olshausenstr. 62, 24118, Kiel, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7158-2920
Antje NuthmannInstitute of Psychology, Kiel University, Olshausenstr. 62, 24118, Kiel, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3338-3434

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The presence of a weapon in a scene has been found to attract observers' attention and to impair their memory of the person holding the weapon. Here, we examined the role of attention in this weapon focus effect (WFE) under different viewing conditions. German participants viewed stimuli in which a man committed a robbery while holding a gun or a cell phone. The stimuli were based on material used in a recent U.S. study reporting large memory effects. Recording eye movements allowed us to test whether observers' attention in the gun condition shifted away from the perpetrator towards the gun, compared with the phone condition. When using videos (Experiment 1), weapon presence did not appear to modulate the viewing time for the perpetrator, whereas the evidence concerning the critical object remained inconclusive. When using slide shows (Experiment 2), the gun attracted more gaze than the phone, replicating previous research. However, the attentional shift towards the weapon did not come at a cost of viewing time on the perpetrator. In both experiments, observers focused their attention predominantly on the depicted people and much less on the gun or phone. The presence of a weapon did not cause participants to recall fewer details about the perpetrator's appearance in either experiment. This null effect was replicated in an online study using the original videos and testing more participants. The results seem at odds with the attention-shift explanation of the WFE. Moreover, the results indicate that the WFE is not a universal phenomenon.

Indexed as

AttentionCell PhoneEye MovementsHumansMaleMental RecallAttentionDynamic scenesEye movementsEyewitness memoryWeapon focus effect

Identifiers

PMID36725782
PMCPMC10545598

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.