Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37917611›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Language directs spatial attention differently in explicit and implicit tasks.

Samuel Shaki, Martin H Fischer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Samuel ShakiDepartment of Psychology, Ariel University, Ariel, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-2340-5401
Martin H FischerDepartment of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How do words with either explicit or implicit spatial meanings (e.g., DOWN, BOOT) shift our attention? Recent studies, presenting prime words followed by probe targets, suggested that, for implicit spatial words, both the spatial meaning of prime words and the target locations must be processed to induce congruency benefits. Here we examined the functional necessity of the latter location component. 91 healthy adults discriminated target letters that followed explicit or implicit spatial words. Words either did or did not have to be semantically processed. Target discrimination speed was used to compute congruency benefits. With explicit prime words, spatial congruency effects emerged without semantic processing instructions. In contrast, with implicit prime words, only instructing their semantic processing ensured a congruency benefit. This shows that, for implicit spatial words, spatial processing of target locations is not necessary; instead, processing the spatial connotation of the prime, together with the identity of the target, can induce congruency benefits. Our results help to understand previous conflicting findings.

Indexed as

LanguageSemanticsAdultAttentionHumansMental Processes

Identifiers

PMID37917611
PMCPMC10621817

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.