Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37171646›Full record

ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2023

Warning signals only support the first action in a sequence.

Niklas Dietze, Lukas Recker, Christian H Poth

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Phasic alerting in visual search tasks.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Niklas DietzeDepartment of Psychology, Neuro-Cognitive Psychology and Center for Cognitive Interaction Technology, Bielefeld University, P.O. box 10 01 31, 33501, Bielefeld, Germany. niklas.dietze@uni-bielefeld.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7103-8717
Lukas ReckerDepartment of Psychology, Neuro-Cognitive Psychology and Center for Cognitive Interaction Technology, Bielefeld University, P.O. box 10 01 31, 33501, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8465-9643
Christian H PothDepartment of Psychology, Neuro-Cognitive Psychology and Center for Cognitive Interaction Technology, Bielefeld University, P.O. box 10 01 31, 33501, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1621-4911

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Acting upon target stimuli from the environment becomes faster when the targets are preceded by a warning (alerting) cue. Accordingly, alerting is often used to support action in safety-critical contexts (e.g., honking to alert others of a traffic situation). Crucially, however, the benefits of alerting for action have been established using laboratory tasks assessing only simple choice reactions. Real-world actions are considerably more complex and mainly consist of sensorimotor sequences of several sub-actions. Therefore, it is still unknown if the benefits of alerting for action transfer from simple choice reactions to such sensorimotor sequences. Here, we investigated how alerting affected performance in a sequential action task derived from the Trail-Making-Test, a well-established neuropsychological test of cognitive action control (Experiment 1). In addition to this task, participants performed a classic alerting paradigm including a simple choice reaction task (Experiment 2). Results showed that alerting sped up responding in both tasks, but in the sequential action task, this benefit was restricted to the first action of a sequence. This was the case, even when multiple actions were performed within a short time (Experiment 3), ruling out that the restriction of alerting to the first action was due to its short-lived nature. Taken together, these findings reveal the existence of an interface between phasic alertness and action control that supports the next action.

Indexed as

AttentionCuesHumansNeuropsychological TestsPhotic StimulationTrail Making TestActionArousalChoice reactionCognitive controlPhasic alertnessPupil

Identifiers

PMID37171646
PMCPMC10182231

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.