Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37318596›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2024

Response uncertainty influences response bias in the sustained attention to response task: a signal detection theory perspective.

Aman Bedi, Paul N Russell, William S Helton

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Aman BediUniversity of Canterbury, Chirstchurch, New Zealand.
Paul N RussellUniversity of Canterbury, Chirstchurch, New Zealand.
William S HeltonUniversity of Canterbury, Chirstchurch, New Zealand. whelton@gmu.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the current investigation, we modified the high Go, low No-Go Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART) by replacing the single response on Go trials with a dual response to increase response uncertainty. In three experiments, a total of 80 participants completed either the original SART with no response uncertainty regarding the Go stimuli, or versions of the dual response SART in which response probabilities for the two possible responses to the Go stimuli varied from 0.9-0.1, 0.7-0.3, to 0.5-0.5. This resulted in a scale of increasing response uncertainty based on information theory to the Go stimuli. The probability of No-Go withhold stimuli was kept.11 in all experiments. Using the Signal Detection Theory perspective proposed by Bedi et al. (Psychological Research: 1-10, 2022), we predicted that increasing response uncertainty would result in a conservative response bias shift, noted by decreased errors of commission and slower response times to both Go and No-Go stimuli. These predictions were verified. The errors of commission in the SART may not be a measures of conscious awareness per se, but instead indicative of the level of participant trigger happiness-the willingness to respond quickly.

Indexed as

Psychomotor PerformanceSignal Detection, PsychologicalConsciousnessHumansReaction TimeUncertaintyAttention, Response biasSignal detection theorySustained attentionSustained attention to response taskTrigger happiness

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.