Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37985594›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2024

Responding, fast and slow: Visual detection and localization performance is unaffected by retrieval.

Lars-Michael Schöpper, Christian Frings

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Moving beyond discrete categories in motor cognition.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lars-Michael SchöpperDepartment of Cognitive Psychology, University of Trier, 54286, Trier, Germany. schoepper@uni-trier.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4302-3563
Christian FringsDepartment of Cognitive Psychology, University of Trier, 54286, Trier, Germany.
Universität Trier · DE

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft SCHO 2000/1-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

According to action control theories, responding to a stimulus leads to the binding of the response and stimulus features into an event file. Repeating any component of the latter retrieves previous information, affecting ongoing performance. Based on years of attentional orienting research, recent boundaries of such binding theories have been proposed as binding effects are fully absent in visual detection (e.g., Schöpper et al., 2020, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 82(4), 2085-2097) and localization (e.g., Schöpper & Frings, 2022; Visual Cognition, 30(10), 641-658) performance. While this can be attributed to specific task demands, the possibility remains that retrieval of previous event files is hampered in such tasks due to overall fast responding. In the current study we instructed participants to signal the detection (Experiment 1) and location (Experiment 2) of dots orthogonally repeating or changing their nonspatial identity and location. Crucially, the dots were either hard or easy to perceive. As expected, making targets hard to perceive drastically slowed down detection and localization response speed. Importantly, binding effects were absent irrespective of perceptibility. In contrast, discriminating the nonspatial identity of targets (Experiment 3) showed strong binding effects. These results highlight the impact of task-dependence for binding approaches in action control.

Indexed as

AttentionCognitionHumansPsychophysicsReaction TimeAction controlAttentional orientingPerceptionTask demands

Identifiers

PMID37985594
PMCPMC10770236
OpenAlexW4388818518

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.